RIA FASHIONS Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, AHMEDABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the order -in -original dated 29 -4 -2003 vide which duty demand was confirmed, seized goods were confiscated and penalty was imposed on the appellant.

(2.) THE relevant facts that arise for consideration are that the godown of the appellant was searched by the Customs officers and some fabrics of foreign origin were found. Appellant was asked to produce documents of licit possession of the said goods which the appellant could not do so and hence the said goods were seized on the ground that these goods were smuggled. Show cause notice was issued to the appellant for the confiscation of the goods and also for demand of duty and imposition of penalty. Appellant resisted the show cause notice on the ground that they were not aware that these goods were smuggled and that the said goods were purchased by them through a broker who had represented that these goods were manufactured by a 100% EOU. The adjudicating authority did not accept the contentions of the appellant and confirmed the demand, confiscated the seized goods with an option to redeem the same on payment of redemption fine and also imposed penalty on the appellant.

(3.) AT the outset the learned consultant appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that their challenge is directed only towards the imposition of penalty and they are not challenging the duty and confiscation. It is her submission that the penalty has been imposed on them under the provisions of Section 114A of Customs Act, 1962 which is not applicable in this case. It is her submission that penalty imposed on the appellant is not correct as they were led to believe that the goods were sold by the 100% EOU and were not aware that the goods were of smuggled nature.