Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2005 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2005 (7) TMI 178 - AT - CustomsApplicability of the Section 14 - duty free goods - Undervaluation Of goods - Export of Polyethylene Newar/Straps to U.A.E. - Adjudication - EXIM - HELD THAT:- Commissioner while dropping the proceedings has upheld the justification of invoking the provisions of Section 14(1) however he has found that no case was made out to hold that the goods exported by M/s. DOL were grossly overvalued. He has observed that evidence of Shri Kamal Chadda of Dubai, who imported the Cargo had not been challenged by Revenue and there was no bar on DRI officers to have examined him, as was evidence his affidavit in Income Tax proceedings at Delhi before the Income Tax Officer. That misdeclaration at Dubai was the effort & result of his employees & that Testimony was accepted by I. Tax Officer & there was no reason arrived & pleaded herein to reject the same when Contra evidence of any kind of & by recording Kamal Chadda's further explanation & his employees statements were not brought on record. When full remittance received through Banking channels is being upheld, the declarations of undervaluation made to Dubai Customs cannot be a reason to arrive at bringing home the charge on the present appellants of having knowledge thereto. The forging documents of the Delhi Chamber Officials by the appellants cannot be conclusively accepted. If the appellants have given duplicate sets of invoices showing different values, that surely cannot be an offence of misdeclaration on Customs Documents in India. Since it is not admitted by the exporters that the lower values on such invoices was the Transaction Value. The price as shown at higher levels are claimed, declared & confirmed to be received via Banking Channels is a fact on record. The fact of duplicate sets being in existence is only a presumption against the respondents, if at all, they have supplied the same. It is common knowledge that fake letter heads, can be duplicated by Computers/Scanners & there is no material in the grounds urged before us to arrive at that, as per forensic evidence, etc they are handiwork of & issued by M/s. DOL especially the invoices with lower prices or they were within the knowledge of M/s. DOL. The gaps & flaws in the re-enquiry made have been observed by the Commissioner which have led him to drop the proceedings & that cannot be allowed to be filled in by this appeal. When in law & on facts, proceedings are found to be not permissible, being void ab inito & on merits there are no reasons to uphold the order of dropping the proceedings we find no merits in the grounds taken to allow these appeals. Consequent to the findings, these appeals are rejected.
|