Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2018 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (10) TMI 1807 - CESTAT BANGALORESeizure of goods - differences in the contents of the invoices and Bill of Entry and the actual goods received - goods imported in the past were also misdeclared as is evident from the invoices - contention of the appellant was that he has not filled the Bill of Entry therefore the misdeclaration of value, quantity and nature of the goods cannot be alleged. HELD THAT:- Learned Commissioner (A) has already given substantial relief to the appellants in respect of the duty and redemption fine imposed on past clearances. Going by the fact that in respect of previous consignments, as per invoices found in the file recovered from the appellant’s premise, were found to be different from that filed before customs. Therefore, circumstantially, there were reasons to believe that the importer was habitually attempting to misdeclare the description, quantity and value of goods. It was not the case of the appellant that the invoices recovered from his possession on 11-1-2005 truthfully contained details of the goods imported vide said consignments. The appellant did not prove that he had the right intentions. The appellant rather than proving his bona fides was harping on mistakes in the investigation and procedures of clearance. The appellant cannot escape due to certain faults in the procedures and mistakes in the investigation. The Revenue need not prove the case with arithmetical precision - a reasonable case has been made out to show the intentions of the appellant in misdeclaring the nature and value with an intention to evade payment of duty. Impugned order upheld - appeal dismissed.
|