9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 340X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g unaccompanied baggages of passengers and goods intended for trade or business in the guise of bona fide gifts in order to illegitimately avail the benefit of duty free provisions granted for bona fide gifts under Notification No.171/1993-Cus. dated 16.9.1993, read with CIECR. 3. The appellants filed the bill of entry prescribed in CIECR and they have subscribed that the goods imported under the bills of entry, were only bona fide gifts etc. for personal use of a value not exceeding Rs. 10,000/- and that the goods imported did not belong to the category of prohibited or restricted goods. 4. According to regulation 13(a) of the Regulation cited supra, the appellants have to obtain authorisation from each of the consignees. But it was found by the original authority as well as the Appellate Tribunal that the imports were made in the names non-existent consignees and that the consignments were split into the name of different consignees and that there was no evidence to support that the impugned goods were bona fide gifts. The common feature in all the impugned orders is that the details of such persons whose names were shown as consignees and who are found to be non-existent has n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... these agents and if available, appellants should be provided with copies. If not, we also do not find any harm in permitting cross-examination of the officers whom the appellants claim to have handed over the documents, if requested for. 8. The next question which was not considered and which had made us realise that should have been considered is the fact that customs duty has been calculated on the basis of a uniform rate and bills of entry have not been assessed. For this purpose all the bills of entry have been treated as having been filed for unaccompanied baggage and provisions have been applied. The learned AR relied upon Section 44 of Customs Act, 1962 to submit that Department was right in undertaking the classification on this basis. Further, on going through the Section, we find that it is applicable only for passenger baggages and postal articles. The articles/goods brought through courier are not clearly covered by Section 44 of Customs Act, 1962. 9. Further, as already observed by us earlier, there is no evidence to show that these goods were unaccompanied baggage. If that is the case, then there has to be a finding in respect of each and every bill of entry that i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... contended that with such a finding of the Appellate Tribunal, it will not be possible for the appellants to put forth their case before assessing authority on remand and in order to substantiate the said contention counsel submits that the courier agents are having any liability to pay the duty that are due to be paid by the consignees. In order to substantiate the said argument, the learned counsel has drawn our attention to Regulations 11, 12 and 13 of CIECR, 1998. For a better appreciation of the argument advanced, we think it is only proper to extract the regulations cited supra: "Regulation 11. Execution of bond and furnishing of security.- The Commissioner of Customs shall require the applicant to enter into a bond in such form with a security of [ten lakh] rupees in case of major international airports of Mumbai, Delhi, Calutta and Chennai and five lakh rupees in case of other airports and Land Customs Stations in cash or in the form of postal security or bank guarantee or National Savings Certificate in the name of the Commissioner of Customs for complying with the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962) and the rules and regulations made thereunder. The conditio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y special inducement or promise or advantage or by the bestowing of any gift or favour or other thing or value; (g) maintain records and accounts in such form and manner as may be directed from time to time by an Assistant Commissioner of Customs or Deputy Commissioner of Customs and submit them for inspection to the said Assistant Commissioner of Customs or an officer authorised by him, wherever required." 10. By placing reliance on regulation 11 counsel submitted that the maximum liability prescribed under regulation 11 is only Rs. 5,00,000/- and therefore, it was not legal and proper on the part of the assessing authority to impose the duty that payable by the consignees on the appellants. The said contention raised by the appellants cannot be sustained in view of the fact that as per regulation 12 the appellants are bound to furnish the bond and security as specified under regulation 11 which renders the appellants liable to pay the customs duty, if any, not levied or short-levied, with interest, if applicable, on any goods taken clearance by the authorised courier if in the opinion of statutory authorities the same cannot be recovered from the importer or the exporter. Apart ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... own motion or on an oral application made by or on behalf of the party aggrieved, immediately after the passing of the judgment, the High Court certifies to be a fit one for appeal to the Supreme Court; or (b) any order passed before the establishment of the National Tax Tribunal by the Appellate Tribunal relating, among other things, to the determination of any question having a relation to the rate of duty of customs or to the value of goods for purposes of assessment." 13. Relying on this provision, it was argued that the subject-matter of the appeals relate to rate of duty of customs and the value of goods for purpose of assessment and that therefore these appeals are not maintainable. But we find that the subject-matter of the case is relating to the alleged illegalities committed by the appellants while transacting the business as couriers carried on by them as per the regulation referred above and therefore such a contention raised by the counsel for the respondent is untenable and hence we hold that these appeals are maintainable before this Court. In view of the facts and circumstances narrated above, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
