2016 (10) TMI 154

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., Authorized Representative (DR) appellant.  for the Appellant. Shri Piyush Kumar, Advocate - for the Respondent. ORDER The brief facts of the case are that the appellant had imported the goods under ATA Carnet Registration No. 1036 dated 16/12/2011 and ATA Carnet Imp. Registration No. 1037 dated 16/12/2011. Both the ATA Carnets were valid upto 06/12/2012. The imported goods were all....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2/2012. For non-exportation of the goods within the stipulated time prescribed under the notification and also within the extended period provided by the Authorities, the Department proceeded against the importer for confiscation of goods and for imposition of penalty. The adjudication order passed in this regard was appealed against before the learned Commissioner (Appeals), which was disposed of....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... and, as such, confiscation of goods and imposition of penalty is not proper and justified. He also submits that duty liability, if any, can be demanded from the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry, who have executed the bond for importation of the goods under Carnet scheme. 4. We have carefully considered the submissions from both the sides and perused the records. 5. Not....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... were neither exported within the normal period of six months nor within the extended period upto 06/12/2012, allowed by the competent authority. Thus, the condition of the notification has not been fulfilled by the respondent -importer for obtaining the benefits provided therein. In this context, the law is well settled that an exemption notification was to be interpreted in line with the words e....