TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (3) TMI 122
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ndent ORDER Brief facts are that the appellant had filed the Bill of Entry No. 8517911 dated 19.10.2018 for clearance of 106.25 MT of goods declared as 'Petroleum Hydrocarbon Solvent (Low aromatic)' and classified under Customs Tariff Heading No. 27101990. In contradiction to the above said declaration, the test report of CRCL in C. No. 35/CRCL/Cus./2018-19/CL-1317(1)/ 26.11.2018 dated 29.11.201....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ort any of the goods notified for exclusive trading through STEs. Therefore, the appellant is not authorized to import kerosene. 2. As per the information given by SIIB, adjudication proceedings were initiated and Order in Original No. 29/2019 dated 27.5.2019 was passed confirming that the goods imported are Kerosene. The original authority directed the appellant to reexport the goods and for tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the goods. It is submitted by him that when the goods are re-exported the appellant does not benefit by sale of the goods and therefore no redemption fine can be imposed. To support this argument, he relied upon the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Sankar Pandi Vs. UOI reported in 2002 (141) ELT 635 (Mad.). It is further submitted that the said decision was followed by the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bove case laws relied by the ld. Counsel for the appellant cannot be applied to the facts of the present case. It is further stated by him that the Commissioner (Appeals) has already given substantial reduction in redemption fine and penalty. He prayed to dismiss the appeal. 5. Heard both sides. 6. From the judgment of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in Sankar Pandi, it is seen that wh....