SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1997 Supreme(Ker) 285

K.G.BALAKRISHNAN, B.N.PATNAIK
Kamvir Mehta – Appellant
Versus
Collector of Customs – Respondent


Judgment :-

B.N. Patnaik, J.

The petitioner challenges the order No. SIB/11/95-CUS dated 3.4.1996 passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Custom House, Cochin 9 (Ext. P14). By this order, the goods in question were held liable to be confiscated under S.111(d) and (m) of the Customs Act, 1962. However, the goods being not available for confiscation, the revised differential duty of Rs. 9,96,212/- and the penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs were imposed and the petitioner was called upon to pay the same.

2. The petitioner is the proprietor of a firm called M/s. Shine Star Industry, New Delhi. It is a small scale industrial unit. He is engaged in the business of assembling photocopying machines by importing some reconditioned components of photocopying machines from Singapore under a valid licence.

Earlier, he had imported similar articles through the Cochin Port from M/s. Drumkin Impex, Singapore. On submission of the Bill of Entry dated 21.7.1994 (Ext. P2), duty was assessed at Rs. 1,80,4111- on the basis of the transaction value and the consignment was cleared. In respect of the next consignment of identical goods, which is the consignment in question, exported by M/s. Drumkin Impex as per the purc












Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top