TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (11) TMI 186
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....: K.K. Agarwal, Member (T)].- This appeal is against the Commissioner's order confiscating nine machines under Sections 111(d) and (o) of the Customs Act, 1962 with option to redeem on payment of fine of Rs. 2 lakhs, demanding differential duty of Rs. 2,99,464/- on three out of nine machines which were imported after 1-3-87 and imposition of penalty of Rs.1 lakh on the appellants under Sec.112 of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed exporters of gem and jewellery and the machines were used for export of gem and Jewellery, though not exclusively, there is no violation of conditions of notification nor of the policy and therefore these machines could neither have been confiscated nor differential duty demanded. In respect of three machines subsequently imported, Notification No. 159/86 was amended on 1-3-87 wherein two addit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e for exports and use for domestic consumption is also permissible. In view of the same, these machines also could not have been confiscated nor differential duty be demanded. 4. Ld. DR, however, submits that even though prior to 1987 there was no requirement of filing a declaration and use for processing of goods meant for exports, the very requirement that the exporters should be registered wit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion is that the machines were not used exclusively for the purpose of exports. Since this was never a requirement of either the policy or the Notification, the confiscation of these machines for violation of policy and Notification cannot be upheld and is accordingly set aside. Even the Commissioner has not demanded differential duty in respect of these six machines. 6. As regards the three mach....