COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS Vs. FABRITEX EXPORTS (P) LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application filed by the Revenue (Appellant) seeks stay of operation of the impugned order, whereby the lower appellate authority held that the goods attempted to be Exported imported by the respondents were not "prohibited" within the meaning of this expression used in Section 113(d) of the Customs Act and further that on such goods no duty was leviable. Learned SDR represents the applicant. There is no representation for the respondents despite notice, nor any request of theirs for adjournment. In the circumstances, we are inclined to dispose of this application.

(2.) THE original authority confiscated certain goods [declared as ladies trousers and ladies skirts], which were attempted to be exported by the respondents. This confiscation was under Section 113(d) ibid. A redemption fine of Rs. 1.00 lakh was imposed in lieu of confiscation. A penalty of Rs. 1.00 lakh was imposed on the party under Section 114 of the Act. The appeal preferred by the aggrieved party was allowed by learned Commissioner (Appeals), who followed the Tribunal's decision in Prayag Exporters (P) Ltd. v. Commissioner affirmed by the apex Court in Commissioner v. Prayag Exporters (P) Ltd. , wherein certain goods which were attempted to be exported were held not to be "prohibited" and accordingly Section 113(d) was held to be inapplicable. On merits, learned Commissioner (Appeals) rejected a confessional statement of a functionary of the company and decided in favour of the party. The Revenue is aggrieved by this decision of the appellate authority.

(3.) LEARNED SDR seeks to distinguish the case of Prayag Exporters (P) Ltd. (supra) and submits that the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) is not sustainable in view of the Supreme Court's judgment in Om Prakash Bhatia v. Commissioner of Customs