Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.18 seconds)
4. Whether Order Is To Be Circulated To ... vs Cc, Lucknow on 9 June, 2008 cites

M/S Karamchand Appliances (P) Ltd vs Cc, Mumbai Ii on 19 February, 2008

3. The contention of the appellant is that Commissioner has not complied with the directions given in the remand order and had not considered their claim under entry at S.No.47-A of DEPB schedule, therefore, order is not sustainable. The appellant also submitted after relying upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Avon Appliances vs CC, Mumbai reported in 2004(172)ELT.465 and upon the Board Circular dt.3.6.97 that the Commissioner of Customs has no jurisdiction to decide the claim under DEPB scheme. The competent authority has to decide the claim of the DGFT and the customs authorities simply has to forward the shipping bill under which the goods were exported with the remarks in respect of exported goods.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 0 - Cited by 3 - Full Document

Weston Components Ltd vs Commissioner Of Customs, New Delhi on 4 January, 2000

7. The appellant also submitted that in the earlier proceedings, the adjudicating authority imposed a penalty of Rs.one lakh whereas in the remand proceedings, the penalty of Rs.2 lakhs has been imposed. The contention is that in the remand proceedings, the quantum of penalty can not be enhanced. We find that as the adjudicating authority at first time imposed penalty of Rs.one lakh and revenue has not filed the appeal against the impugned order hence the penalty is reduced to Rs.one lakh. In respect of the appeal of the revenue regarding imposition of redemption fine, we find that in the present proceedings as the appellant misdeclared the discretion of the goods to claim higher DEPB, therefore, goods are liable for confiscation and if the goods are liable for confiscation, the appellants are liable for fine also. The revenue relied upon the decision of the Honble Supreme Court in the case of Weston Components Ltd. vs CC, New Delhi reported in 2000(115)ELT.278(SC). The Honble Supreme Court held that redemption fine is imposable even after release of goods on execution bond. The goods were released on the bond would not take away the power of the Customs Authorities to levy redemption fine if subsequent to release of goods import was found not valid or that there was any other irregularity which would entitle the customs authorities to confiscate the goods.
Supreme Court of India Cites 0 - Cited by 126 - Full Document
1