2009 (3) TMI 111

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... CDR, for the Respondent. [Order].- The facts of the case in brief are that the appellant-unit were a manufacturer of Polyester Texturised Yarn/Twisted Yarn/Crape Yarn failing under Chapter 54 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. A team of Central Excise Officers visited the factory premises of appellant-unit and carried out necessary checks in the presence of two independent panchas. On ver....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ant unit have also admitted this offence committed by them under the Customs Law. The officers seized the said goods under the reasonable belief that the same were liable for confiscation under the Customs Law. A show cause notice was issued by the Department on this count. Adjudication and appeal consequent to issue of show cause notice have resulted in confirmation of demand of Customs duty of R....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....llant in view of the fact that they had procured the goods from the foreign origin from open market without any bill and therefore cannot be treated as importer for the purposes of demanding duty under Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962 and no penalty under Section 114A can be imposed. He also cited decision of this Tribunal in the case of Shri Rupeshbhai R. Zaveri [2007 (217) E.L.T. 386 (Tri.-Ah....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Fortune Impex v. Commissioner [2004 (167) E.L.T. A134 (S.C.)], in support of this view. As regards applicability, it is quite clear that both the broker as well as Director could not produce any evidence to show that the goods have been legally imported into the country. This obligation rests on them in view of the fact that the goods are notified under Sect....