TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 438X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... contents of baggage were known to her and none else There was no declaration of value of goods carried by passenger Petitioner herself accepted all mistakes, including of non-filling up relevant column in slips or declaration Passenger did not in her documents declare value of goods imported by her Company officials also could not declare same to Customs and in terms of Section 77 of Customs act, 1962 Thus, impugned order does not suffer from any error of law Petition being devoid of merits, hereby dismissed Decided against assesse. - Writ Petition No. 2027 of 2014 - - - Dated:- 27-7-2015 - S. C. Dharmadhikari And G. S. Kulkarni, JJ. For the Appellant Rep by: Mr D B Shroff, Senior Counsel with Mr Vipin Jain Mr Prabha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rds this channel. There is, therefore, a clear contradiction in the impugned orders. The findings are contradictory and inconsistent. Our attention was invited to the statements of the two officials and copies of the same are at pages 98 and 101 of the paper-book. These statements reveal as to how the officials were directed by one Badal Kumar to the screening. The officials were not aware of the contents in the baggages. In the circumstances and when the allegations in the show-cause notice are also consistent, the finding at page 283 of the paper-book are clearly perverse. They also ignore the valuation report. It is the Department which obtained opinions of two experts / valuers and copies of the same are at pages 44 and 63 of the paper- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orders. The Government while dealing with the petitioner's revision application found that the petitioner-passenger arrived at CSI Airport, Mumbai, on 18th October, 2010. On arrival, she handed over her passport and disembarkation slip to one Kirit Sodha and Raymond Vakulkar, officials of the company JSW Steel Limited. They were orally directed to complete Customs formalities. The petitioner then left the baggage hall. Both officers opted, according to the impugned orders, for Green Channel where they were diverted by Customs officers for screening of the baggage and further examination. We do not find any substance in the contention of Mr. Shroff simply because the channel was opted by these officers knowing fully well that the petiti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r and as recorded are referred to in extenso at page 283 of the paper-book. Therefore, we do not find that the order suffers from any perversity. We do not attach any importance and weightage to what the officials and of the company stated. Surely if the petitioner's Protocol enabled her to leave the terminal before even the baggage was cleared and she could rely upon her company officials to clear the goods, then, she cannot turn around and blame the Department of Customs and other officials for having scrutinized and verified the baggage and documents. If the documents revealed certain discrepancies and which are accepted by her, then, it is not for us to substitute our opinion with that of the authorities and concurrently rendered. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
