TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 40X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have been realized to the extent of such value. Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - C/70740/2017-CU[DB] - FINAL ORDER NO 71326/2018 - Dated:- 2-7-2018 - Mrs. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) and Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (Technical) Shri Mohd Altaf (Asstt. Commr.) AR for Appellant Ms. Stuti Saggi (Advocate) for Respondent ORDER Per: Anil G. Shakkarwar Present appeal filed by Revenue is directed against Order-in-Appeal No. NOI-CUSTM-000-APP-783-17-18 dated 18.08.2017 passed by Commissioner (Appeals), Central Tax, Noida. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent had filed eight shipping bills dated 30.08.2013 at CMA-CGM Port, Dadri for export of Agricultural and Horticultural machin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... covered under Section 149 of the Act, which allows amendment of documents after it has been presented in the Customs House. It also provides that no amendment of shipping bills shall be so authorized to be amended after the goods have been exported, except on the basis of documentary evidence which was in existence at the time the goods were exported. He has further recorded that the original order records that the amendment of the shipping bill was allowed under the provisions of said Section 149. The learned Commissioner (Appeals) has held as follows:- by allowing amendment, obviously under Section 149, the authority had no rationale to deny having allowed said amendment under Section 149. So after allowing the such amendment the Depa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t, 1962 which says that That following export goods shall be liable to confiscation:- (i) any goods entered for exportation which do not correspond in respect of value or in any material particular with the entry made under this Act or in the case of baggage with the declaration made under Section 77 . Since the exporter initially declared overvalued prices of ₹ 16.59 crores which on interception of the consignment by the SIIB, ICD, Dadri, wasreduced to ₹ 8.71 crores, this shows the mala fide intention on the part of the exporter and a clear cut case of mis-declaration of value and covered under Section 113 (i) ibid. (iv) The exporter initially declared prices of export goods as ₹ 16.59 crores which on interception of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... spondent submitted that the first Appellate Authority has held that after allowing such amendment it was not challenged by Revenue before Commissioner (Appeals) and the said order has become final and that the Commissioner (Appeals) has held that in view of the said order under said Section 149 the said Order-in-Original dated 22.05.2014 is not sustainable and also that why such finding by learned Commissioner (Appeals) is not sustainable has not been stated by Revenue in their appeal. 5. Having considered the rival contention and on perusal of record we find that the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has given categorical finding that the goods were allowed to be exported after allowing the amendment to the documents presented and the resp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
