Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2007 (10) TMI 206

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ber (J) and A.K. Srivastava, Member (T) [ Order per: M.V. Ravindran, Member (J)]. - 1. These appeals are directed against Order-in-Original No. CCP/ADJ/SR/07A/2007, dated 28-3-2007. 2. The relevant facts that arise for consideration are that the officers of Marine and Preventive Wing of Customs (Prev.) Commissionerate visited the godown located at a place called Bhiwandi on 17-2-2003 and noted that imported goods i.e. polyester fabrics were lying there. The officers directed the godown-keeper to produce the document or record of such foreign originated fabrics. As the godown-keeper could not produce any document/record of the foreign origin fabrics, the officers, in the presence of two independent panchas and godown-keeper, systemat .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n the cartons. He relies upon the above bills of entry to submit that the duty liability has been discharged on these goods. He submits that the entire quantity was seized in 2003 and even if confiscation is set aside, they will be unable to use these goods and the revenue should be directed to pay the value of the fabrics so seized by them. He also seeks that interest should be paid to them. He relies upon the judgment of the Tribunal in the case of Mohammed Yaseen, Bangalore v. Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore , 2005 (189) E.L.T. 56 (T) = 2005 (102) ECC 305 (Tri.) for this proposition. He also relies upon the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan in the case of Rang Lal v. Union of India , 2002 (139) E.L. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... as issued under the provisions of Sec. 123 of the Customs Act, 1962. We find that the goods which were seized were synthetic polyester fabrics and covered by the Notification issued under Sec.123. Provisions of Sec. 123 mandates for the goods which are notified under this section it was for the claimant to prove that such goods were not smuggled and are in then possession licitly. In this case seizure of the synthetic polyester fabric was done by the authorities on 18-2-2003 from a godown at Bhiwandi. The current appellant i.e. M/s. Warren Trading Pvt. Ltd. had darned the ownership of such seized goods. Hence it was for the said M/s. Warren Trading Pvt. Ltd., to prove that the goods were not of smuggled nature. 6. The fabrics were seize .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... originated from Korea or Taiwan. The appellant M/s. Warren Trading Pvt. Ltd. produced two bills of entry viz. 000235 dated 2-1-2003 and 000609 dated 9-1-2003. The packing list attached with the bills of entry clearly indicate that the appellant had imported 167 cartons of synthetic polyester fabrics totalling to 44,488 yards of fabric. The adjudicating authority in his impugned order at para 28 has tried to correlate the goods which were seized, to those goods which were imported by the bills of entry and came to the conclusion that except for six entries none of the entries are matching. We are afraid to accept this proposition. The details of the seized goods as per panchanama clearly indicates that the country of origin is Korea or Taiw .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , and on the fact that six entries in the bill of entry No. 000235 dated 2-1-2003 were matching totally with the goods which were seized under panchanama, would indicate that the goods which were confiscated, are licitly imported into India. As such, we hold that the goods which were seized and subsequently confiscated by the authorities were duty paid goods and the revenue has failed in its endeavour to prove that the goods were of smuggled nature. 7. The contention of the appellant's counsel that today they may not be able to use the goods which were seized in the year 2003 seems to be on the strong footing. The goods which were seized and confiscated by the authorities were synthetic polyester fabrics which during the relevant period .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates