2018 (5) TMI 451

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Order No.46/2004 (CUS). Petitioner filed an application u/s.127-B of the Customs Act, 1962, in relation to the show cause notice dated 18.03.2004 issued by the third respondent herein answerable to the Additional Commissioner (Customs). The Settlement Commission, by the impugned order, held that the application for settlement is not admissible as the proceedings initiated under the show cause do not propose to assess, levy and collect any differential duty and therefore, it is not a case as defined u/s.127-A(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. On the above reason, the application was held to be not admissible and was not allowed to be proceeded with vide Section 127-C(1) of the Act. To examine the correctness of the impugned order, we need to tak....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... or courier, as the case may be, and in relation to such document or documents, a show cause notice has been issued to him by the proper officer; (b) the additional amount of duty accepted by the applicant in his application exceeds three lakh rupees; and (c) the applicant has paid the additional amount of customs duty accepted by him along with interest due under Section 28-AA. In terms of Clause (a), the applicant has filed a bill of entry or a shipping bill accompanying the goods imported or exported, as the case may be and in relation to such document or documents, petitioner is entitled to maintain an application. In the instant case, admittedly, a show cause notice has been issued to the petitioner dated 18.03.200....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ming within the purview of Section 127-B since the presence case is one of prima facie smuggling, there is no question of levy, assessment and collection of customs duty and as such the dispute will not come within the purview of Section 127-B, which contention was found in favour of the Department by the learned single Judge. We are not able to countenance this contention also for the reason that as per second limb of Section 125 of the Customs Act, if the goods confiscated are not prohibited goods, an option has to be given to the importer to pay, in lieu of confiscation, such fine i.e., the redemption fine. In such case, the importer has to pay duty and charges payable in respect of such goods. In order to arrive at the duty and charges ....