TMI Blog2008 (9) TMI 608X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ies on Custom authority, betel nuts directed to be confiscated cannot be said with certainty to be of foreign origin, formulated is in affirmative and it is held that in the facts and circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in reversing the order of original and the appellate authority, finding arrived at by the Tribunal is based on sound principle and cannot be said to be perverse, Tax cases stand disposed off accordingly - 13 of 2001 - - - Dated:- 18-9-2008 - Chandramauli Kumar Prasad and Dr. Ravi Ranjan, JJ. REPRESENTED BY : Shri Rakesh Kumar Singh, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri Birju Prasad, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order]. Various quantity of betel nuts were seized by the officers of the Dire ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o establish that the betel nuts are of foreign origin the authority rely on the trade opinion. 6. Mr. Rakesh Kumar Singh, appearing on behalf of the petitioner submits that persons well versed in the trade having opined that betel nuts were of foreign origin, there was no justification for the Tribunal to reject that opinion. 7. Mr. Birju Prasad, appears on behalf of the Opposite party. 8. We do not find any substance in the submission of Mr. Singh. It is not in dispute that betel nut is non-notified item and, as such, the onus to prove that the same is of foreign origin lies on Custom authority. It is further not the case that betel nuts available in the country are significantly different than those of foreign country. The contentio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n view of aforesaid, the answer to second question No. (b) is also in the negative and we hold that the finding arrived at by the Tribunal is based on sound principle and cannot be said to be perverse. 11. To put the record straight, it is worth mentioning here that a large number of cases involving the same issue i.e. Tax Case No. 68 of 2002 (Commissioner of Central Excise, Patna v. M/s. SCI Sheo Shankar Chemical Industry India Ltd.), Tax Case No. 69 of 2002 (Commissioner, Customs Department Govt. of India v. Shri Devi Shankar Tiaway) and Tax Case No. 54 of 2002 (Commissioner of Customs, Patna v. Pyus Chakrabarty, Prop. Pijus Trading Co.) have been dismissed by order dated 13-9-2006 and 8-9-2006 by a Division Bench of this Court. 12. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
