2025 (12) TMI 140

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he 'Customs Act). Such penalty has been affirmed in the Order- in-Appeal No.C.Cus II No.401/201 dated 21.04.2015 (the impugned order) issued by the Commissioner (Appeals-II), Custom House, Chennai. 2. Briefly stated the facts germane to this appeal are as follows: - i. Appellant, an 100% Export Oriented Unit (EOU) had imported rough granite blocks, but failed to file necessary Bills of Entry under Section 46 of the Customs Act. The imported consignment remained uncleared since 10.09.2013. ii. In this backdrop, the custodian of the goods issued a Notice under Section 48 of the Customs Act, on 05.11.2013, which was followed by Notice dated 07.12.2013 calling for clearance of the said goods within a period of 15 days. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t a license, the Original Authority held as under: "In the instant case, assuming that the importer is a 100% EOU Company and they are permitted to clear even restricted goods without any license subject to the condition that they have to execute a Bond as required under 100% EOU scheme and they have to produce procurement certificate in support of their clearance under 100% EOU scheme. If they do not clear the goods under the scheme, they cannot abandon the goods by citing their 100% EOU status. In the instant case the importers have decided to abandon the impugned goods and the same cannot come under the preview of 100% EOU scheme." vi. Accordingly, the Original Authority ordered for absolute confiscation and penalty of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ction also. The expression prohibition not only in the policy but under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962 would also cover any restriction, whether complete or partial. In this context, reliance is placed on Supreme Court's decision in the case of Shaikh Mohammed Omar v. CC reported in AIR 1971 SC 293 (Alternate citation:13 E.L.T 1439 (SC)), which decision was also followed by the government in the case of Mohammed Hussain reported in 138 E.L.T 943, wherein it was held that restricted goods under EXIM policy which is now called Foreign Trade Policy, are prohibited goods for the purpose of the said acts. This Tribunal in the case of CC v. M.R. Exports, reported in 197 E.L.T 523, has also followed the same. 6. It is also seen that Se....