AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) 
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter. 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (12) TMI 1484
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al is filed against the order in appeal dated 18.4.2010 which upheld the order in original dated 29.12.2009 in terms of which 41 shawls were confiscation under Section113(d), (e) and (l) of the Customs Act, 1962 and penalty of Rs. 50,000/- was imposed on the appellant under Section 114 ibid. 2. The brief facts of the case are as under: The appellant filed a Shipping Bill dated 4.12.200....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ve shawls were drawn as sample) to be similar to the said 5 shawls. The adjudicating authority thus confiscated the said 41 shawls under 113(d), (e) & (l) of the Customs Act, 1962 for being attempted to be exported and penalty of Rs. 50,000/- was imposed. 3. When the case was taken up today for hearing there was no representation on behalf of the appellant nor was there any request for adjournm....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al it has stated that proper chemical analysis of the shawls was not conducted by wildlife authorities. The appellant has no basis to assert that when it did not seek any cross-examination of the wildlife authorities who tested the samples. There can be various ways to test a sample depending upon the purpose of test. In these circumstances, the order of confiscation of 41 shawls for containing ma....