Page 13 - ELT_15th August 2020_Vol 373_Part 4

2020 ] INDEX - 15th August, 2020 xi
Competent Authority to adjudicate gold smuggling case - See under
PENALTY ...................................... 514
Complexity of fact and law, dismissal of settlement application sustainable -
See under SETTLEMENT APPLICATION .................... 496
Confiscated goods sale, matter with regard to recovery of redemption fine
and penalty from sales proceeds referred to Larger Bench - See under
REDEMPTION FINE ................................ 558
Confiscation - Absolute confiscation of goods - Foreign currency concealed
inside inner linings of check in baggage - Release of impugned currency
on payment of redemption fine contested - HELD : Shri Virender Verma
and Tushar Kumar part of Hawala racket, attempted to illegally smuggle
huge quantity of forex out of country - Legal provisions of Foreign
Exchange Management Act, 1999, Foreign Exchange Management
(Export and Import of Currency) Regulations, 2000 and Section 2(33) of
Customs Act, 1962 read with Section 11 ibid clearly stipulate that attempt
to smuggle foreign currency out of India which has not been procured
from authorized sources is ‘prohibited’ - Therefore impugned foreign
currency seized, falls in category of ‘prohibited goods’ and liable for
absolute confiscation under Sections 113, 113(d), 113(e), 113(h) and 113(i)
ibid - Lower Authorities failed to appreciate facts of case in correct
perspective and ordered release of impugned currency on payment of
redemption fine which should have been confiscated under said Section
without giving an option of redemption - Impugned currency confiscated
under Sections 111 and 113 of Customs Act, 1962 — In Re : Virender Verma
(G.O.I.) ........................................ 570
— and penalty - Confirmation of demand under two heads not sustainable -
Confiscation of urea and penalty set aside - Section 111(m) of Customs
Act, 1962 — Indian Farmers Fertilizers Co-Operative Limited v. Principal Commissioner of
Customs, Jamnagar (Tri. - Ahmd.) ............................. 530
— redemption fine and penalty - Import of Cosmetics at Garhi Harsaru ICD
- Sticking MRP stickers prior to release - Confiscation proceedings on the
ground that aforesaid ICD is not notified Port of Import of said items
imported without MRP stickers, not sustainable - ICD at Garhi Harsaru
falls under jurisdiction of Commissioner of Customs, ICD, Patparganj
which is a Notified Port - Further, there is no legal prohibition in sticking
MRP stickers prior to out of charge by Customs, which has been done in
this case - Impugned order of confiscation, redemption fine and penalty
set aside - Sections 111 and 112 of Customs Act, 1962 — Highlink Exporters
Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, Delhi (Tri. - Del.) ................... 553
Confusion in petitioner’s stand, dismissal of settlement application
sustainable - See under SETTLEMENT APPLICATION ............. 496
CONSERVATION OF FOREIGN EXCHANGE AND PREVENTION OF
SMUGGLING ACTIVITIES ACT, 1974 :
— Section 3(1)(ii) - See under DETENTION ..................... 493
— Section 7 - See under DETENTION ........................ 493
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA :
— Article 226 - See under SEIZED GOLD ...................... 451
— See also under WRIT PETITION ..................... 470
Cosmetics import at Garhi Harsaru ICD, confiscation, Redemption Fine and
penalty not sustainable on the ground of non-notified Port - See under
CONFISCATION, REDEMPTION FINE AND PENALTY ........... 553
EXCISE LAW TIMES  15th August 2020  13