2013 (4) TMI 164

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r the Respondent. ORDER The appellants had imported garment accessories such as glass beads, lace, ribbon, tape, chain roll, chaton etc. The Revenue suspected that the appellant had mis-declared the quantity and the value of goods at the time of its import and they seized goods from the shops/business premises of the appellant. There was also seizure of goods covered under two Bills of Entry....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ertificate. (v) An undertaking by the party that they will not dispute/challenge the quantity and identity of the seized goods at any stage. 2. In respect of goods seized from container No. TGHU 8477189 covered under B/E No. 4231673, dated 1-8-2011. (i) On execution of Bond equivalent to the value of the seized goods Rs. 32,56,529/-. (ii) On payment of differential duty amounting to Rs....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d 13-3-2012 ordering that bank guarantee should be executed for 25% of the bond value covered fine and penalty that may be imposed. The Counsel for the appellant submits that they are presently not seeking provisional release of goods seized from the godown/shops and they are aggrieved only by the order in respect of the goods lying uncleared at the ICD. It is their contention that after payment o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ption fine and penalty has to be imposed. On adjudication which can much more that the 25% of the differential duty and therefore if the goods are released on the terms of the order dated 6-3-2012 may not be possible to realise the fine and penalty that may be imposed. 6. Considered arguments on both the sides. The terms of the order dated 6-3-2012 safeguards both differential duty and fine and....