TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (8) TMI 115
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent per : F.I. Rebello, J. Admit on the following questions : (a) Whether the goods held to be improperly imported are liable for confiscation under Section 111 of the Customs Act, 1962, even though the same are cleared and not available for seizure? (b) Whether on the facts and the circumstance of the case the Hon'ble CESTAT is correct in law in holding that since the imported goods we....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....8. The Commissioner rejected the declared value of goods imported by the assessee in respect of 13 consignments over a period from 4-8-2003 to 20-9-2006 and ordered re-assessment of the goods imported. On the re-determined value of Rs. 44,82,452/-. The differential duty of Rs. 8,20,543/- was confirmed under Section 28(2) of the Customs Act, 1962 and recovery of interest under Section 28AB of Custo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ners and set aside the order to this extent. As regards redemption fine which was imposed on goods as they were not available for confiscation, the CESTAT quashed and set aside the order-in-original to the extent of the direction of imposition of redemption fine under Section 125 of the Customs Act. 4. CESTAT in its order relied on the judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eleased on the application by the appellant and appellant executed a bond. The court then observed that in these circumstances, if subsequently it is found that the import was not valid or that there was any other irregularity which would entitle the customs authorities to confiscate the said goods, then the mere fact that the goods were released on the bond being executed, would not take away the....