TMI Blog2010 (8) TMI 781X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alty set aside. Appeal disposed off - decided partly in favor of appellant. - Appeal No.C/575, 580/2009 - - - Dated:- 12-8-2010 - Mrs. Archana Wadhwa And Mr. B. S. V. Murthy,JJ. Shri M.P. Kulkarni Shri J.S. Negi, SDR ORDER Per: Mrs. Archana Wadhwa:- Both the appeals are being disposed off by a common order as they arise out of the same impugned order passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Kandla, vide which he has confiscated 375 MTs of non-Basmati Rice (mis-declared as Indian Basmati Rice), at a declared value of Rs.2,01,62,607/-, with an option to re-deem the same on payment of redemption fine of Rs.25 lakhs. In addition, penalty of Rs10 lakhs has been imposed on M/s Krish Agro Overseas and penalty of Rs.5 lakhs aga ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rice from rice mills, who were supplying the same in bags and sending directly at the port of loading. It was due to oversight, the labourers might have packed non-basmati rice in the packing of Basmati rice and there was no malafide intention to export wrong goods. 6. Statement of Shri Bhupender Gupta, partner of M/s Swastik International and proprietor of M/s G.M. Traders, Delhi, who had supplied the goods to M/s Krish Agro Overseas, was recorded on 14.5.09. He submitted that the orders for supply of Basmati Rice were placed by M/s Krish Agro Overseas. However, by looking at the samples, he agreed that the goods supplied were Non-Basmati Rice and he attributed the same to human error, on the basis of which proceedings were initiated ag ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s have admitted that the actual goods covered by respective Bill of Entries were non-Basmati Rice, which is a prohibited item for export, as per DGFT Notification No.93(RE-2007)2004-2009, dt.1.4.08. All of them have attributed the export of non-Basmati rice instead of declared Basmati rice to the mistake on the part of their employees. However, we find that there is nothing on record to substantiate the above plea of the appellants. Further, it cannot happen that the same mistake occurred on the part of the employees in respect of all the four exporters, who are independent exporters. As such, it has to be concluded that the non-Basmati rice was meant for export under the garb of Basmati rice by all the appellants under a design, thus, invi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
