TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (5) TMI 490
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Jindal The appellants have challenged the impugned order imposing redemption fine and various penalties on the appellants. 2. The brief facts of the case are that M/s. Montu Enterprises, the importer filed one Bill of Entry wherein they have imported a consignment from Dubai in container No. IPXU 2127381. As per the packing list, there were 440 cartons of various toys declaring the assessable v....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the container were meant for another party viz. M/s. H.D.Associates, Mumbai which were sent from Hong Kong to Dubai for further shipment to M/s. H.D.Associates who had to clear those goods. This contention is supported by various correspondences between the supplier and the appellants. Therefore, there was no intention of mis-declaration of the impugned goods by the appellants. Accordingly, redemp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ontaining 263 cartons of digital cameras and 150 cartons of wrist watches. If the goods were not intercepted, the same would have been cleared without claiming the ownership by M/s. H. D. Associates as the actual owner of the goods viz. digital cameras and wrist watches. Therefore, we hold that the goods are liable for confiscation. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the impugned order hol....