2022 (1) TMI 472

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....date fixed for personal hearing. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has also given interim reply on 30.09.2021 and has asked for further time to give a reply. However, without giving an adequate opportunity to reply, the respondent has passed the impugned order. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the impugned order is contrary to Board Circular dated 10.03.2017 bearing Circular No.1053/2/2017-CX (F.No.96/1/2017-CX.I). The learned counsel also submitted that the petitioner has filed a final reply to the Show Cause Notice on 11.10.2021. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner is specifically drawn attention to Paragraph 14.3 in the Board Circular, which reads as under:- "14.3. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... respondents. 9. Though the respondents have filed their counter, considering the fact that the impugned order is a non-speaking order, I am inclined to take up the writ petition and dispose of. 10. The petitioner received the notice of personal hearing on the first date fixed for the personal hearing. The petitioner has also given an interim reply on 30.09.2021 and had asked for further time to give a reply. However, without giving an adequate opportunity to reply, the respondent has passed the impugned order. The petitioner has filed a final reply to the Show Cause Notice on 11.10.2021 unaware of the impugned order of the respondent. 11. The impugned order is contrary to para 14.3 of the Board Circular dated 10.03.2017 bearing Circular....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rds that notice under Section 48 of Customs Act, 1962 was issued by the custodian to the importers to clear the impugned goods and the importers did not come forward to clear the goods. Since the importers replied to SCN vide their letter dated 11.10.2021 stated that the impugned goods are the one, which has been originally exported from Chennai Seaport Customs to the overseas buyer at China for R& D Purpose and it is the very same goods, which has been re-imported back to the country. 7. In view of the above, I have no hesitation in holding the impugned goods, namely "Used Motor Parts weighing 225kgs (G.Wt.) valued at Rs. 1,50,000/-, vide IGM No.2246340/07.02.2020 and Line No.836 is liable for penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs ....