TMI Blog2020 (1) TMI 488X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r Indo Myanmar Trade under Notification 09/1995-Customs. Betel nut was also importable at NIL rate of duty Notification 96/08-Customs and 09/2009-Customs, under Scheme of Duty Free, Quota Free Import from Least Developed Country to which Myanmar belong. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Customs Appeal No. 75742 of 2017 - Final Order No 77023/2019 - Dated:- 23-12-2019 - HON BLE SHRI P.K. CHOUDHARY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) AND HON BLE SHRI BIJAY KUMAR, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri Poulami Sikdar, Advocate for the Appellant (s) Shri S. Guha, A. R. for the Respondent(s) ORDER PER SHRI P.K. CHOUDHARY: Appellant Shri Manik Ranjan Paul, M/s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hose dry betel nuts from Mizoram. The Custom Officer believed that the betel nuts had been illegally smuggled, seized all four trucks alongwith the betel nuts. Investigation was carried out, finally order in original dated 29.03.2017 was passed by Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) NER, Shillong, in terms whereof four vehicles as seized were confiscated and were valued at ₹ 19,35,000/-. Option was given to the respective owners of the said vehicles to pay a fine of ₹ 2,00,000/- each in lieu of confiscation under Section 115 (2) of the Customs Act, 1962. Penalty of ₹ 1,00,000/- was imposed on Shri. Bimalendu Roy under Section 112 (b)(ii) of the Customs Act, 1962, penalty of ₹ 50,000/- was also imposed on Shri Sujit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... M/s J H family Enterprise (Lalduha) Champhai, Mizoram and (iv) M/s Thahleikhuaia Champhai, Mizoram. (d) The appellant had also produced, in support of his case, four credit memos issued by the said persons all dated 27.02.2016, the quantity of dry betel nut in the said memos are shown as 9000kgs, 15000kgs, 16500 kgs, 15000kgs, in total 55500 kgs. In addition, he had produced seven bills of entry, duly signed by Inspector and Superintendent Land Customs Station, Zokhawthar. (e) In effect, the appellant has admitted that the betel nuts were of foreign origin i.e., were imported from Myanmar. (f) In the order in original, the Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) has recor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ds were smuggled goods. (iii) The gap between purported import of goods and the purchase thereof cast doubts on the linkage between the two. It is questionable that the owner of the goods would have procured the betel nuts on credit without knowing the suppliers beforehand. (h) The first question for consideration is as to whether the betel nuts seized were the same as were imported pursuant to seven bills of entry duly signed by the Inspector and Superintendent of Customs Land Station. The finding recorded by the adjudicating authority is that there was a gap of one year and secondly, betel nuts in two trucks were whole whereas in two other were split where as in the bills of entry, the betel nuts were w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h sides and perused the appeal records. 4. We find that the purchase documents of goods finds record in Para 7 of the Show Cause Notice. Verification at supplier s end by the department showing genuine transaction find mention in Para 15 of the Order-in-Original Statements of the Appellant dated 04.05.2016 and 26.07.2016 respectively, are in Para 10 and Para 13 of the order-in-Original, stating that he had purchased the goods from Champai, Mizoram, which were legally imported from Myanmar under Indo Myanmar Trade Agreement. Furthermore, we find from the Order-in-Original that the suppliers have in their reply to the Show Cause Notice have confirmed the sale of the goods under seizure to Shri M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
