Page 210 - ELT_15th May 2020_VOL 372_Part 4th

600 EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 372

interfere in the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and accordingly, the same
is sustained.
7. In view of the above discussion and analysis, the present appeals are
dismissed.
(Operative portion of the order already pronounced
in the open Court)
_______

2020 (372) E.L.T. 600 (Tri. - Ahmd.)
IN THE CESTAT, WEST ZONAL BENCH, AHMEDABAD
[COURT NO. III]

Shri Ramesh Nair, Member (J)
RADHE EXIM PVT. LTD.
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, AHMEDABAD

Final Order No. A/10399/2020-WZB/AHD, dated 5-2-2020 in Appeal No.
C/12906/2018
Confiscation - Contravention of import policy - Import under licence -
Date of reckoning - Completion of import into India on entrance of goods into
territorial water of India and not date of filling of Bill of Entry - If importer
possessing licence on or before date of import, goods imported would be cov-
ered by licence and not be liable for confiscation - Though in import policy
date of reckoning given as per date of Bill of Lading but import gets completed
only when goods enters into India - Contention of lower authorities that im-
porter was not possessing licence on date of Bill of Lading incorrect - Date of
import is very relevant but not available on record - Matter to adjudicating au-
thority for passing a fresh order after verifying the date of import - Sections
2(23) and 111 of Customs Act, 1962. [paras 6, 7, 8]
Matter remanded
CASES CITED
Interia Impex v. Commissioner — 2009 (239) E.L.T. 71 (Tribunal) — Referred ........................... [Paras 4, 6]
Jasmat Parshottam Ganesh v. State of Gujarat — 1995 (76) E.L.T. 548 (Guj.) — Referred ......... [Paras 4, 6]
Koluthara Exports Ltd. v. Commissioner — 2017 (351) E.L.T. 191 (Ker.) — Referred ................ [Paras 4, 6]
Reckitt & Colman of India Ltd. v. Collector — 1996 (88) E.L.T. 641 (S.C.) — Referred .............. [Paras 4, 6]
Royal Impex v. Commissioner — 2019 (366) E.L.T. 820 (Mad.) — Referred ..................................... [Para 5]
Saci Allied Products Ltd. v. Commissioner — 2005 (183) E.L.T. 225 (S.C.) — Referred ............. [Paras 4, 6]
Venus Petrochemicals (Bombay) Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner
— 2019 (366) E.L.T. 176 (Tribunal) — Referred ........................................................................... [Para 5]
REPRESENTED BY : Shri Amal Dave, Advocate, for the Appellant.
Shri Gobind Jha, Superintendent (AR), for the
Respondent.
[Order]. - The brief facts of the case are that the appellant have imported
“20MM Used Tyre Rubber Shreds” falling under CTH 4004 00 00 and filed Bill of
Entry No. 3161720, dated 8-9-2017 for clearance of the said imported items. The
EXCISE LAW TIMES  15th May 2020  210