TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (12) TMI 101
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....: - 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. The parties agree that both these appeals can be disposed of by a common order because they challenge CESTAT's impugned order dated 28 June 2024. 3. Mr Sharma proposes the following substantial questions of law in Customs Appeal (L) No. 30034 of 2024 :- "1. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Hon'ble CESTAT is correct in setting aside the Order of Confiscation of and consequently imposition of the redemption fine of the goods unloaded u/s. 111(h) r/w Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962. 2. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the Hon'ble CESTAT is correct in setting aside the Order of Confiscation of and consequently imposit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... law in holding that the Commissioner of Customs had failed in ascertaining if the said bonded tanks were within such customs area when none of the parties had raised such contention either before the Adjudicating Authority or before the CESTAT? 3. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the CESTAT was correct in law in holding that the commissioner of customs should have estimated the "assessable value" in accordance with Section 2(41) of the Customs Act, when the said issue was not agitated by any of the Parties either before the Adjudicating Authority or before the CESTAT? 4. Whether the CESTAT was correct in law in holding that the Regulation 12 of the (Custody and Handling of Goods) Regulation, 2016 does n....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e some excess material had to be stored for a limited period are in the same gated complex. He submitted that necessary permissions were applied for and obtained for such storage. He explained the circumstances in which there was a marginal increase of value in some instances, and such explanations were also accepted. 9. For all these reasons Dr Kantawala submitted that these appeals may not be admitted. 10. The rival contentions now fall for our determination. 11. Under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962, appeals can be entertained only if they involve substantial questions of law. Mr Sharma's contentions are factual issues that the tribunal has considered in considerable detail. In particular, the discussion in paragraphs 7....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e SLP against the Bombay decision. In any event, even these contentions are based upon the decisions of the Gujarat and Madras High Courts, were considered and rejected by us in the case of Ganesh Benzoplast Limited (supra). 15. In these matters, the Commissioner has imposed penalties by invoking the residual provision of Section 117 of the Customs Act, 1962. We disapproved such an approach in the case of Ganesh Benzoplast Limited (supra). This Court held that the residual provision of Section 117 of the Customs Act cannot be invoked upon realising that no fines or penalties could be imposed under Sections 111 and 112 of the Customs Act,1962. 16. The tribunal also considers the argument about exceeding the value in some instances in d....