9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 765X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the case are that on 05.11.2014, the Customs officers (Prev.), Patna, while patrolling Bhithamore near Indo- Nepal border saw a truck parked on the roadside and some persons were unloading some packages from the said truck. The said Officers, intercepted the truck and found 508 cartons, remained out of 530 cartons of pesticides. After thorough investigation, a show cause notice dated 30.04.2015 was issued to the appellants alleging that they were found involved in illegal attempt for exportation of 508 cartons of pesticides without any valid Bill of Export and the same are liable for confiscation under Section 113(b) and 115(2) of the Customs Act, 1962, and liable for imposition of penalty. The adjudicating authority confiscated the seiz ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... manded the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) for fresh decision on the basis of submissions made by the noticees. 5. The Commissioner (Appeals) vide his order dated 09.07.2018 observed as under:- "10. From the discussion above, one thing is clear. It is not a very clear cut case. On the one hand there are substantial documents buttressing the claim of the appellants about the entire operation being perfectly legal and there being no wrongdoing on their part. On the hand there is no satisfactory explanation for the truck being present at Bhithamore instead of Jainagar wherefrom it was to leave the Indian borders. While the appellants have tried to explain this by way of nearness of Janakpurdham from Bhithamore as compared to Jainagar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r claims he had nothing to do with it. This is baffling. There are some glaring omissions in the investigation as well. There is nothing on record to show who directed the driver to go to Bhithamore instead of Jainagar. They should have enquired from the Commercial Tax department as to whether they allow exemption of VAT, in case of export, with / without proof of export and whether they allow it if the check post has been changed without intimation / necessary amendment. 11. I believe there is no case against appellant nos. 1 and 2. They have complied all the provisions and whatever lapses are there, like change of checkpost, are because of the transporter. The cases of rest of the appellants' points towards glaring omission and commiss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Vaishali Seed. In respect of the pesticides sold to M/s Vaishali Seed, M/s Dow Agro Science India (P) Ltd, appears to have satisfied the investigating agency, with documents and stated that M/s Vaishali Seed was their Distributor and the impugned pesticides were actually supplied to them. The seizure was effected due to shortage of 22 (twenty two) cartons of pesticides in the truck. It is observed that later the appellant accounted for the same. There was no further investigation to verify the claim of the appellant but it was simply observed as concocted. The goods of other two parties were released though the goods of all three parties were seized from the same truck and booked for attempt to illegal export. 11. On the basis of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
