2018 (9) TMI 1292

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....assed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as "the CESTAT" for short), South Zonal Bench, Bangalore, by which, order dated 19.01.2016 passed by the Principal Commissioner of Customs is upheld. Briefs facts of the case are that: The appellant imported gold bars under two Bills of Entry from M/s. Valcambi SA, Switzerland. The appellant had imported the gold bars under advanced authorization and if the imports were under advanced authorization, they are duty free. To claim exemption of duty under Notification No.12/2012-Cus dated 17.03.2012, the import of goods shall be gold bars other than tola bars, should bear the manufacturer's or the refiner's engraved serial number and weight expressed ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Whether the Hon'ble Tribunal was right in confirming the Orders appealed against without assigning any reasons. (b) Whether the Tribunal was right at Law to have upheld the levy of re-export fine contrary to Circulars and Law. (c) Whether the order of the Respondent No.1 and confirmed in Appeal levying penalty was sustainable contrary to the provisions of the Customs Act. (d) Whether the Respondent and Tribunal were right at Law to have confirmed the penalty, when the circumstances did not warrant the same. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that there is no fault or mistake on the part of the appellant, if the imported gold bars were not having engraved weight on the gold bars. It is the mistake of the exporter. For abse....