TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 1366X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ll as criminal proceedings initiated, that the respondent No. 3 stands exonerate - order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) justified - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - Customs Appeal Nos. 55, 56, 57 & 58 of 2012 - 55921 - 55924/ 2016 - Dated:- 20-12-2016 - Dr. Satish Chandra, President And Mr. V. Padmanabhan, Member (Technical) Sh. K. Poddar, AR for the Revenue Shri G. M. Sharma, Consultant for the Respondent ORDER Per V. Padmanabhan These four appeals have been filed by Revenue against the order-in-appeal dated 13/25.10.2011 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals), Jaipur. The relevant order-in-original is dated 23.07.2008. The three passengers namely S/Shri Ajay Gulati, Jatin Kapur and Kapil Rai were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated against Sh. Ajay Gulati and others also have been quashed by the Hon ble Delhi High Court. 3. The entire dispute is with reference to the imports undertaken by appellant No. 1. It is alleged by the Revenue that the description of the imported goods viz., Mixed Metal Scrap (mainly consisting of Brass Scrap) has been misdeclared as Mixed Metal Scrap (mainly consisting of Stainless Steel Melting Scrap). It is further alleged that the goods have been undervalued. The basis for such allegation is the documents retrieved from the custody of respondent No. 3 when he was intercepted at IGI Airport, New Delhi and his statement recorded. The document recovered indicated that the goods covered by the two imported containers were originally val ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hereof, the same needs to be corroborated on the basis of independent evidence. Testing of samples with imported goods could have been done to establish the correct nature of the imported goods. The documents recovered from respondent No. 3 have never been corroborated or supported by any statements from the exporters. It is also placed on record in the adjudication proceedings as well as criminal proceedings initiated, that the respondent No. 3 stands exonerate. As such we find no valid reason to interfere with the impugned order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). 4. In view of the above, the impugned order is upheld and the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed. ( Pronounced on 20.12.2016 ) - - TaxTMI - TMITax - Custom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
