2007 (5) TMI 161

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of the Customs Act and the appellant was not having evidence of legal import/possession of the same. (b) On application by the appellant, the seized goods were provisionally released on execution of a bond for the value of Rs. 10,03,400/- with a bank guarantee for Rs. 2,06,800/-. When the goods were released an amount of Rs. 4,56,475/- was paid by TR-6 challan dated 5-9-2002 towards duty. (c) The original authority by his order dated 8-9-2003 confiscated the goods and also confirmed the demand of duty under Section 28(1) of the Customs Act and appropriated towards duty the sum of Rs. 4,56,475/- which was earlier paid by the appellant on 29-8-2002 at the time of provisional release. (d)The Commissioner (Appeals) vide his order date....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....plication should be treated as the date on which duty paid for the purpose of Section 15(1)(c) of the Customs Act. Whatever the rate of duty applicable on the date, he makes the application should be treated the rate at which duty is payable and the balance amount out of the deposit should be refunded. 5.The ld. DR submits that the goods have been released provisionally on payment of duty and the question of treating the said amount as deposit does not arise in the light of subsequent order of the Commissioner (Appeals). 6.1I have carefully considered the submissions from both sides. The issue boils down to whether the payment of Rs. 4,56,475/- is to be treated as duty paid when the goods were provisionally released or only as a depos....