9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (6) TMI 653X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pondent. [Order per : Gowri Shankar, Member (T)]. - This appeal is against the order of the Commissioner of Customs, Ahmedabad ordering confiscation of the 109 mobile telephones and some other goods which the appellant sought to smuggle through the Customs in Ahmedabad, valuing Rs. 10,52,800/-, ordering their confiscation under Clauses (d) and (l) of Section 111 of the Act and imposing penalty ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d these telephones. This was not a document that was relied upon in the notice but we cite this as evidence of the state of mind of the appellant. 3. It is next contended that the value of these telephones should be Rs. 6.71 lakhs, based on the invoice dated 14-5-1999 issued by IIford Cellular, 310 Green Lane, IIford, Essex, UK. This invoice had no number, nor it is signed although it bears ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... old him. Such an attempt to actively support the employee's case leads us to conclude that the relationship between the appellant and Marshall goes beyond that of employee and employer; Marshall evidently has a closer relationship with the appellant. The invoice issued by Marshall (if he issued it) is, therefore, not a document issued in the ordinary course of business, and not worthy of credence. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ions and that some reduction in penalty is called for. We note the departmental representative contention that there was a clear premeditated attempt to smuggle the goods without paying appropriate duty upon them. Having regard to the submissions regarding the value, we reduce the penalty from Rs. 6.5 lakhs to Rs. 5.5 lakhs.
6. Appeal partly allowed. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
