COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, COCHIN Vs. RUSHAB PLASTICS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Revenue is seeking stay of the operation of the Order -in -Appeal No. 198/2003, dated 26 -12 -2003. The respondents did not appear when notice was issued through registry. Therefore, the Commissioner was directed to serve a copy of the notice and place the acknowledgement. The Learned SDR files a letter from the Commissioner reporting service of notice of hearing and the respondents has signed the hearing notice but none appeared on behalf of the respondents therefore the stay application is heard on merit. The learned Commissioner has also filed an affidavit in support of the stay application. The Commissioners finding is that no redemption fine is required to be imposed on the goods which are directed to be re -exported which is challenged in this appeal. The Commissioner has set aside the redemption fine. Learned SDR submits that in terms of the latest judgment in the case of Hemant Bhai R. Patel v CC, Ahmedabad [2003 (153) E.L.T. 226 (Tri. - LB)]. The redemption fine is imposable when there is a contravention. In view of this citation, he submits that the order is not legal and proper and therefore stay be granted. He also submits that the value was enhanced based on the evidence of contemporaneous imports and the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) setting aside the enhancement is not in keeping with the evidence produced by the investigating agencies.

(2.) ON a careful consideration we find that Commissioner has made out a very strong case in favour of the Revenue for grant of stay of the operation of the order for the reasons stated therein. In view of the cited judgment by learned SDR the order setting aside the confiscation and redemption fine while ordering for re -export does not appear to be a correct order in the light of latest case law cited by learned SDR. Therefore, the stay application is allowed. The operation of the impugned order is stayed till the disposal of the appeal. Appeals to come up for hearing in their turn.