2016 (4) TMI 924

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hese three aircrafts and filed Bills of entry in July, 2009, March and September, 2010. These aircrafts were assessed provisionally and released. As per the information now submitted, the assessments were yet to be finalized. Later, the appellants sold the aircrafts to foreign company and again the same were brought back to India on lease agreement. As no shipping bill at the time of export, bill of entry at the time of re-import were filed after the sale of these aircrafts, they were seized by the customs authorities as these aircrafts were appeared to be liable for confiscation under section 113(h) and section 111(j) and 111 (l) of the Customs Act, 1962. On request by the appellants, these aircrafts were provisionally released by the juri....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....0% of the amount fixed by the original authority. Learned Counsel prayed for adopting similar ratio in the present appeals also. 4. Learned AR contested the appeals and explained that the appellants did not act in a bonfire manner. They are involved in similar violations in respect of other aircrafts also. In some of the transactions, they have not disclosed the sale of aircrafts to foreign buyers to the custom authorities and the whole case came out because of inquiry done by the customs authorities. Since the export and re-import of these aircrafts happened without customs documentation, these goods are liable for confiscation with a clear liability for redemption fine, penalty apart from duty liability. He prayed for rejection of these ....