Page 20 - ELT_1st September 2020_Vol 373_Part 5

xviii EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 373
Jurisdiction of Customs to parallel enquire when police already
investigating on complaint of Customs about involvement of police staff
in smuggling - See under INQUIRY ........................ 604
KARNATAKA TAX ON ENTRY OF GOODS ACT, 1979 :
— Entry 52 of 1st Schedule - See under DREDGER ................. 662
Leather - Finished leather - CLRI report indicating that goods are finished
leather - Such goods classifiable under Tariff Item 4102 29 20 of Customs
Tariff Act, 1975 and not under Chapter 59 ibid as textile materials —
Commissioner of Customs (Air), Chennai v. ABC Leathers (Tri. - Chennai) ........... 713
LED panel lights drivers, absolute confiscation on account of error in
description of BIS number on imported drivers not sustainable - See
under CONFISCATION .............................. 685
Legal evidence - Retracted statements of co-noticees not constituting legal
evidence for penalty imposition on main accused - See under PENALTY ... 676
Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 - See under DREDGER ................ 662
Natural justice violation in a baggage case adjudication, appeal
maintainable before CESTAT - See under APPEAL TO APPELLATE
TRIBUNAL ..................................... 673
Natural justice violation - See under ORDER .................... 578
Non-availability of exported goods, confiscation not sustainable - See under
CONFISCATION .................................. 692
Ocean going vessels/ship, dredgers are covered in it - See under DREDGER ... 662
Order of CESTAT - Natural justice violation - Very sketchy and cryptic
order of CESTAT, Kolkata not dealing with every aspect of that ought to
be gone into in deciding the statutory appeal both on facts and on law -
CESTAT order set aside and case remand to CESTAT - Section 130E of
Customs Act, 1962 — Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) v. Deep Jyoti Wax Traders
Pvt. Ltd. (S.C.) ..................................... 578
Organic Cotton Yarn export on concessional duty payment, rebate cannot be
denied on ground that goods were exempted under another notification -
See under REBATE ................................. 594
PENALTY :
— and interest - Appeal to Supreme Court - Arguable case made out in an
appeal of low tax effect - Supreme Court decline to interfere but penalty
and interest set aside subject to deposit of entire amount of duty within
six weeks - Section 35L of Central Excise Act, 1944 - Rule 26 of Central
Excise Rules, 2002 — PSL Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jaipur (S.C.) ...... 577
— and redemption fine - Misdeclaration and misclassification of exported
goods - Penalty under Section 114 of Customs Act, 1962 dependent upon
goods being held liable for confiscation under Section 113 ibid - No
provision to confiscate goods already exported, hence goods cannot be
confiscated - Therefore, penalty also does not sustain and question of
order imposing redemption fine under said Section 125 ibid also does not
arise - Penalty under Section 114A ibid also unsustainable as section
provides for “penalty for short levy or non-levy in certain cases” and
evidently, no duty is involved in said case - Sections 114, 114A and 125 of
EXCISE LAW TIMES  1st September 2020  20