9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 419X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... udi Abha. Initially the goods manifested under item No. 21 of the said IGM indicated the name and address of the consignee as "Mustaq Trading Co., Govandi, Mumbai". Subsequently, the appellant received a manifest correction notice from the port of loading asking them to change the name and address of the consignee to "R.A. Apparels, Chennai". The appellant applied for amendment in IGM No. 2010343/21, dated 14-4-2011 filed in respect of vessel Saudi Abha by application dated 27-5-2011. The copies of the original documents such as Bill of Lading, Invoice, Purchase Order, Proof of Remittance, etc., in the name of M/s. R.A. Apparels were also enclosed. The appellant had manifested Bill of Lading No. NSAUAB 152, dated 21-2-2011 in the aforesaid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation of non-payment for the same, was cancelled and a fresh Bill of Lading was issued showing the consignee as R.A. Apparels. It was found that R.A. Apparels have produced original documents like. Bill of Lading, Invoice and Purchase Order and proof of remittance to the shipper/seller whereas Mushtaq Trading Company whose name appeared originally in the IGM have failed to produce any such evidence or original import documents. Further, Mushtaq Trading Company admitted that the crane under import is not of the same model for which they have made initial part payment. Further, the supplier/shipper have also categorically averred the crane in question was sold to R.A. Apparels and original documents were released to R.A. Apparels only. On suc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4, 27-2-2015, 24-3-2015, 29-4-2015 and today. Thus, it is decided to dispose of the appeal on merits upon hearing the learned AR and as per the statement of the facts and grounds of appeal, and the documents on record. 4. The grounds raised by the appellant that the appellant have acted on the instruction of the overseas shipper and no mala fide can be attributed to them only for applying for the change of the name of the consignee in the IGM, after the ship was given Entry Inwards by the Customs department. Further, the appellant relies on the Circular No. 44/2005-Cus., dated 24-11-2005, which reads as follows :- "The matter was re-examined. It has been decided by the Board that all amendments to the Import General Manifest (IGM) m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... circumstances. It is further urged that there is no finding in the impugned order alleging or indicating any fraudulent intention or act on part of the appellant. It is further urged that the Commissioner has erred in not following the departmental instructions and further erred in confiscation of consignment and imposing fine and penalty which is wholly arbitrary and fit to be set aside. 4.2 Further, the appellant relies on the ruling of this Tribunal in the case of Laxmi Saw Mill v. Commissioner of Customs, Tuticorin - 2008 (224) E.L.T. 312 (Tri.-Chennai), wherein it was held that amendment or substitution of another person's name as an importer is a major amendment. However, it is to be allowed if there is no fraudulent intention ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
