1998 (11) TMI 234 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal against the order releasing teak logs of Myanmar origin
- Consideration of evidence and contradictions in statements
- Benefit of doubt and remand for de novo adjudication

Analysis:
1. Appeal against the order releasing teak logs of Myanmar origin:
The appeal was filed by the Revenue against the impugned order of the Commissioner, Customs, Shillong releasing 101 pieces of round teak logs of Myanmar origin. The appeal was made under the provisions of Section 129D(1) of the Customs Act, 1962. The Commissioner had ordered the release of the teak logs based on the respondents' claim that they were the same logs released to another individual earlier. However, the Revenue contended that there were discrepancies in the statements and evidence provided by the parties involved, raising doubts about the authenticity of the claim.

2. Consideration of evidence and contradictions in statements:
The Revenue argued that investigations revealed that the consignees had not received any teak logs from the claimed supplier, and there were discrepancies in the quantity of logs sold and purchased between the parties involved. The timing of events, such as the dates on the challans and the actual receipt of goods, raised suspicions about the legitimacy of the transactions. The Commissioner's decision to release the teak logs without fully considering these discrepancies and contradictions in statements was challenged by the Revenue.

3. Benefit of doubt and remand for de novo adjudication:
Upon review, the Appellate Tribunal found merit in the Revenue's arguments regarding the inconsistencies in statements and evidence. The Tribunal agreed that the adjudicating authority had not adequately considered crucial factors before releasing the teak logs. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the case back to the Commissioner, Customs for fresh adjudication. The decision to remand the case was based on the need for a more thorough examination of the evidence and contradictions presented during the proceedings.

In conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal by remanding the case for de novo adjudication, emphasizing the importance of considering all evidence and addressing contradictions before making a decision on the release of the teak logs of Myanmar origin.