9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (12) TMI 748X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /s. S.S. Overseas. The goods which are designated to Patparganj New Delhi, were in transit and were intercepted for illegal faulty import. Action of the respondent is premature. 3] The respondent had conducted search of repairing shop of the applicant, as the applicant dealt with M/s. S. S. Overseas in the past. It is submitted that, in the search only cash of Rs. 27,37,000/- was found. The applicant issued summons and he had provided entire record of the transaction. The applicant has no concern with the M/s. S. S. Overseas. Applicant had issued letters and clarified his innocence. In the search dated 31/05/2024, the stock found was of repair and other material, which has no concern with the applicant. The applicant has submitted his prof ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lading. There was forgery of documents in the past. Applicant is proprietor of M/s. ACJ Computronix, is the actual beneficiary. The applicant was aware that, old used electrical items are prohibited, he misdeclared these goods as motherboard, power supply and imported in the name of M/s. S. S. Overseas. Further respondent has replied para-wise, to the application and pray for rejection of bail, as there is need of custodial interrogation. 8] Heard Ld. Advocate Gangan for the applicant and Special Prosecutor for the respondent. 9] Ld. Adv. for the applicant submits that, there was no bill of entry filed by applicant or by any other person. The applicant has no concern with the said consignment. It is submitted that, respondent had arrested ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nchanama dated 31/05/2024 shows recovery of Rs. 27,37,000/- from the office of M/s. ACJ Computronix in New Delhi. Admittedly on interception of the consignment, the goods found were 4600 old used laptop, 1546 CPUs. 14] From the aforesaid material on record it become crystal clear that, there was mis-declaration of the goods. 15] The respondent in its reply has reproduced the statement of proprietor M/s. S. S. Overseas Premanand Dixit. Prima facie this statement shows that, present applicant had allegedly suggested to open a company in the name of this witness and applicant will use IEC for import of goods. Not only this, it is alleged that, present applicant had imported 10 consignments declared as motherboard. If the statement of Santosh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bank statement of M/s. ACJ Computronix. Prima facie applicant has not supplied the invoices of the transaction between his firm and M/s. S. S. Overseas. The applicant had never appeared before customs authority on the pretext of sickness, business tour etc. 18] Thus while dealing with anticipatory bail, I find that, the applicant had suppressed the relevant documents from the custom authority. In such circumstances, though there is no bill of entry, the applicant has alleged nexus and his custodial interrogation becomes necessary. 19] On behalf of applicant reliance is placed on the decision of M/s. R.S. Impex Vs. C.C. New Delhi, 2017(9) TMI 925 and on the decision of Garden Silks Limited and others Vs. Union of India (1999) 8 SCC 744. I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
