2008 (4) TMI 115

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Order Per M. Veeraiyan Member (T) (for the Bench)] - This is an appeal filed by the Department against the order of the Commisioner dated 31.3.04.   The notice issued by the registry to the respondent to the address originally given by the respondent has been returned undelivered stating that no such firm was found in the given address. Therefore, we take up the appeal for final disposal....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....mand of draw back of Rs.39,21,156/- and  also imposed penalties on various persons involved in the illegal export. 4. The present appeal is limited to the following issues:- (1) According to the Department, the Commissioner should have confiscated the goods and in the absence of goods should have imposed redemption fine in lieu of confiscation. Fort this purpose, the learned DR relies o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... in not ordering confiscation of the goods,   it is noticed that the goods have already been exported.  They were not available for seizure and the question of confiscating them may not arise.  A close reading of Section 125 indicates that confiscation which amounts to taking over the ownership of the offending goods, is penal in nature. The offer of option for redemption on pa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion fine in this case may not be warranted. 6. We find that a sum of Rs.10,53,000/- stands deposited by the respondents during the course of investigation. The grievances of the Department that there is no specific order of the Commissioner directing adjustment of the said amount towards amount ordered to be recovered may not be entirely correct. Since the amount of  Rs. 39,21,156/- is cle....