2013 (12) TMI 175

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... G.S. Export, Navi Mumbai, the exporter and M/s. D.P. Logistics Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai, the CHA. The appellant filed a shipping bill No. 7980986, dated 23-9-2012 for the shipment of a container, consisting of coriander seeds valued at Rs. 8,21,540/-. The shipping bill was processed and 'Let Export Order' was given only on 26-12-2009 by the proper officer of the Customs. In the meanwhile, the vessel, M.V. Olympia sailed on 25-12-2009 even before the LEO was issued. Accordingly, a show cause notice was issued alleging violation of Section 40 and Section 51 of the Customs Act, 1962 and also liability to confiscation of the goods under Section 113(g) and to impose penalty under Section 114(iii) ibid. The case was adjudicated and penalty of Rs. 50,00....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nfiscation under Section 113(g) of the Customs Act and consequently, the appellant are liable to penalty under Section 114(iii) ibid. 5. I have carefully considered the rival submissions. 5.1 There is no dispute regarding the fact that the vessel has sailed on 25-12-2009 whereas the LEO was given only on 26-12-2009. As per the provisions of Section 113(g) "any goods loaded or attempted to be loaded on any conveyance, or water-borne, or attempted to be water-borne for being loaded on any vessel, the eventual destination of which is a place outside India, without the permission of the "proper officer" of the Customs is liable to confiscation. In the case before me, the goods have been loaded and the vessel has sailed before the LEO was ....