TMI Blog2021 (11) TMI 343X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he importer. Therefore, no duty can be assessed on such goods under Section 17 of the Customs Act, 1962. There is also no responsibility on the importer or to any other person from whom the goods are seized to keep or produce the import documents to establish their legal import once they have been cleared for home consumption. The goods can be used, sold, re-sold etc. without any duty either on the importer or any subsequent buyer of such goods to keep or produce the import documents. Of course, if the goods have been smuggled into India, not through the designated Customs Ports, Airports or Land Customs Station, they will be liable for confiscation, but it must be established that the goods have been so imported. In this case, the good ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , who held as follows :- i) I order for absolute confiscation of the seized Betel Nuts having total weight of 19.50 M.T. as detailed in the Inventory of Goods of the Seizu8re Case No.06/CL/IMP/DRI/SLG/2017-18 dated 27.10.2017 valued at ₹ 39,00,000/- (Rupees Thirty-Nine Lakhs) only under section 111 (b) 111 (d) of the Customs Act, 1962 read with the Plant Quarantine (Regulation of Import into India) Order, 2003 under provisions of the extent Foreign Trade Policy for illegal importation into India from Myanmar in contravention of the provisions of the Act and the Policy ibid. ii) I order for confiscation of 250 nos. Gunny Bags used for packing the smuggled betel nuts should not be confiscated under Section 119 of the Custom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arch Centre, Ward No.4, Hailakandi, Assam-788151 under Section 112(a) and 112(b) of the said Act for his acts of omission and commission as discussed hereinabove. viii) I impose a penalty of ₹ 2,69,246/- (Two Lakhs Sixty-nine Thousand Two Hundred Forty-six Rupees) only on Shaik Allabakshu, S/o Kareem Abdul, D. No.1/549-23A, Bypass Road, Rajiv Nagar, Gudivada, Krishna District, Andhra Pradesh 521301 under Section 112(a) and 112(b) of the said Act for his acts of omission and commission as discussed hereinabove. ix) I impose a penalty of ₹ 4,00,000/- (Fopur Lakhs Rupees) only on Shri Sayeed Ahmed Shaikh, S/o Shri Rashid Ahmed Shaikh, Proprietor of M/s.S.A. Enterprises, 8/D/5, Sagar Cooperative Housing Society, Sector-1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roduced by the Appellant were found to be not satisfactory. In respect of some goods, the Customs Act, 1962 reverses the burden of proof and makes it the responsibility of the person from whom the goods are seized or the owner of the goods to prove that they were not smuggled under Section 123. It reads as follows:- SECTION 123. Burden of proof in certain cases . - [(1) Where any goods to which this section applies are seized under this Act in the reasonable belief that they are smuggled goods, the burden of proving that they are not smuggled goods shall be - (a) in a case where such seizure is made from the possession of any person, - (i) on the person from whose possession the goods were seized; and (ii) if any person, other ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o India from a place outside India but does not include goods which have been cleared for home consumption; (26) importer , in relation to any goods at any time between their importation and the time when they are cleared for home consumption, includes [any owner, beneficial owner] or any person holding himself out to be the importer; 5. From the above definitions it is clear that even if the goods are of foreign origin, if they have been imported and cleared for home consumption, they cease to be imported goods thereafter and the importer ceases to be the importer. Therefore, no duty can be assessed on such goods under Section 17 of the Customs Act, 1962. There is also no responsibility on the importer or to any other person from wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
