Dismissed

The Commissioner of Customs (Import) v. Carrara Marbles and Grante Industroes

Bombay HC24 Mar 2005CUSTA/19/2003

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay disposed of a Customs Application where the Tribunal sought this Court's opinion on prior orders reducing customs redemption fines and penalties. Relying on a previous judgment, the Court held that the Tribunal was right and dismissed the application.

What did the court decide?

Application dismissed with no order as to costs.

The Commissioner of Customs (Import) Vs Carrara Marbles… — Customs and Excise | Bombay HC (2005)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORIGINAL SIDE.

¶2

 CUSTOMS APPLICATION NO.19 OF 2003.
 The Commissioner of Customs(IMP)... Applicant.
 vs.

¶3

 M/s Carrara Marbles and Granite

¶4

 Industries. ... Respondent.

¶5

 Shri P.S. Jetly with Y.R. Mishra for the applicant.

¶6

 CORAM: V.C.DAGA &

¶7

J.P.DEVADHAR,JJ.
 DATED: 24-3-2005.

¶8

 P.C.

¶9

 1. Heard learned Counsel for the applicant. The
 Tribunal has referred questions for the opinion of
 this Court reading as under:

¶10

 1."Whether on the facts and in the
 circumstances of the case the Tribunal was
 right in law in reducing the redemption fine
 imposed under sec. 125 of the Customs Act,
 1962 from Rs.80,00,000/- to Rs. 6,50,000/-
 and penalty, imposed u/s 112(a) from Rs.
 8,00,000/- to 2,00,000/- by following its
 earlier orders in the cases of M/s Stonemann
 Marble Industries and M/s Flora Marbles,
 without appreciating that the facts in the
 instant case are wholly distinguishable from
 the facts of those case.

¶11

 2." Whether on the facts and in the
 circumstances of the case the Tribunal was
 right in law in scaling down the redemption
 fine and the penalty in respect of a negative
 list item by following its earlier orders
 without appreciating the individual merits of
 the case."

¶12

 3."Whether on the facts and in the
 circumstances of the case the Tribunal was
 right in law in intervening with the
 redemption fine of Rs.80,00,000/- imposed
 under section 125 by the Commissioner of
 Customs (Import) and reducing it to Rs.
 6,50,000/- and with the penalty of Rs.
 8,00,00/- imposed under section 112(a) by the
 Commissioner of Customs (Imports) and reducing
 it Rs.2,00,000/- without examining the facts
 of the case."

¶13

 2. The above questions have already been answered

¶14

 by this Court in the case of Collector of Customs,
Nhava Sheva vs. Marmo Classic reported in 2003 (156)
ELT 14 (Bom.) in favour of assessee and against the
 revenue. In this view of the matter, application is
 dismissed with no order as to costs.

¶15

 (J.P.DEVADHAR,J.) (V.C.DAGA,J.)

¶16

 ********

The Commissioner of Customs (Import) v. Carrara Marbles and Grante Industroes

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Commissioner of Customs (Import) v. Carrara Marbles and Grante Industroes

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Siddhivinayak Ispat Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Siddhivinayak Ispat Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India and Ors.

The Commissioner of Customs (Import) Vs Bharat Water Works

The Commissioner of Customs (Import) Vs Royal Impex

The Commissioner of Customs (Import) Vs Bharat Water Works

The Commissioner of Custom (Import) Vs Mahavir Industries