TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1999 (12) TMI 58
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Agencies) Private Limited, New Delhi, who, in turn, used to arrange for supply of hop pellets required by the appellant. On 11-6-1991 the appellant was informed that 2,000 kg. of hop pellets had been despatched to their brewery which was received by them on 20-7-1991. The hop pellets so received by the appellant were from M/s. Arusan Industries who, in turn, had received the same from M/s. Integrated Exports, Madras. In view of certain raid conducted by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence in the premises of the appellant with regard to the said hop pellets, they came to know that there was certain investigation being conducted by the Customs Department with reference to the said consignment of hop pellets. Since the appellant was a bona....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uestion was the subject-matter of an earlier proceeding under Section 111(d) of the Act; consequent to which the goods in question were released on payment of redemption fine and the purchase made by them was subsequent to the said redemption order made under Section 125(2) of the Act. Therefore, it is impermissible to subject the same goods for confiscation for a second time and further subject it to a fresh levy of redemption fine, penalty or duty. The appellant had also contended that since it is only a purchaser from an importer who had redeemed the goods under Section 125(2) of the Act, hence there could be no liability which could be fastened to it. In regard to duty payable, if any, at the most action could be taken under Section 28 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ere released on payment of redemption fine, it was found as a result of the investigation that the said goods were heavily undervalued. It was contended that the subsequent proceeding was an independent proceeding, therefore, the same was liable for confiscation for violation of Section 111(m) of the Act and consequently fresh proceedings contemplated under Sections 112 and l25 of the Act were permissible since the subsequent proceedings were for a different violation of the Act and had nothing to do with the earlier proceedings. 4. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties. It is seen that under Section 111 of the Act, the goods which were brought in contravention of Clauses (a) to (p) of that Section are liable for confiscation. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rmitting the redemption of goods, firstly, to assess the market value of the goods and then to levy any duty or charge payable on such goods apart from the redemption fine that he intends to levy on sub-clause (1) of that Section. 6. In the instant case, it is an admitted fact that after issuing a notice as contemplated under Section 124 of the Act, to the importer of the goods in question and adjudication proceeding under Section 125 had been conducted and the goods in question were released on payment of redemption fine, in such an event it matters little whether the adjudication was under which sub-clause of Section 111 because whichever is the sub-clause, there was an obligation on the adjudicating authority to find out the market va....