2018 (7) TMI 1016

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Member (Judicial) Shri S. Sankaravadivelu, Advocate For the Appellant Shri A. Cletus, ADC (AR) For the Respondent ORDER Per Madhu Mohan Damodhar After hearing both sides, we find that the issue concerns admitted export of banned items namely non-basmati rice, pulses, wheat, wheat flour and Semolina in the guise of other grocery items. We find that on identical issue concerning the same appel....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... C/374/2009) The adjudicating authority also ordered for appropriation of Rs. 85 lakhs already paid. Appellants have filed these appeals only against penalties imposed. 2. Today when the matter came up for hearing, on behalf of the appellants, Ld. Advocate Shri S. Sankaravadivelu draws attention to the fact that even for the live consignments, penalties had been reduced by the Tribunal in the cas....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed. 4. Heard both sides and have gone through the facts. 5. It is important to note that the Tribunal in the final order relied upon by Ld. Advocate (supra), dealt with live consignments of goods which were available for inspection and verification. The Tribunal considered it proper and appropriate in that case to reduce the penalty substantially. However the present appeals are related to the c....