2016 (7) TMI 644

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt. 2. Brief Facts: 2.1 M/S K.R & Sons (CHA) filed four shipping bills on behalf of M/S GMR Industries Ltd., respondent herein, for export of a total quantity of 4500 MT of High Carbon Ferro Chrome (HCFC) to M/S S.K. Resources Ltd., Hongkong for delivery of cargo at Pohang Port, Korea under DEPB scheme through Visakhapatnam port. After visual inspection Let Export order was granted. Thereafter, goods were passed for shipment the goods were loaded into the vessel MV ANDHIKA TARUNAGA from 17.04.2005 to 19.04.2005. After completion of loading the cargo, the Chief Officer had endorsed the Mates receipt and shipping bill for receipt of full quantity. The vessel sailed from Visakhapatnam port on 19.04.2005. Subsequently four Bills of Lading....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....following order: (i)  I hold that the goods valued at Rs. 76,33,079/- (Rupees Seventy Six Lakh Thirty Three Thousand and Seventy Nine Only) are technically liable for confiscation under Section 113 (i) & (k) of the Customs Act, 1962, but I refrain from confiscating the goods as they are not available physically for confiscation and also there is no revenue implication. (ii)  I impose a penalty of Rs. 1000/- (Rupees One Thousand Only) on M/S SGS India Limited, Visakhapatnam in terms of Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962. (iii)  I impose a penalty of Rs. 1000/- (Rupees One Thousand Only) on Shri N. Vivekanand, M/S SGS India Limited, in terms of Section 117 of the Customs Act, 1962. (iv)&nbs....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....owed to be moved to the Port. The movement started from 25.02.2005. These trucks on arrival at the port were not weighed up to 10.03.2005 citing the reason that the port weigh bridge was mal-functioning. The surveyors merely verified the seals and unloaded the trucks without weighing even a single truck. Pilferage occurred during movement of cargo from factory to port. Though exporters started pursuing the matter with Police department, they failed to bring to the notice of Customs Department. 5. The adjudicating authority refrained from confiscating the missing cargo as it was not physically available for confiscation. It was observed further that though M/S GMR Industries acted in a negligent manner in not insisting on weighing the car....