9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (6) TMI 100X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dian Ports of Cochin, Madras and Calcutta. At Cochin port, it discharged 577 bags more than the manifested quantity, at Madras port it discharged 277 bags less than the manifested quantity, and at Calcutta Port, according to the Customs authorities (based on the Port Trust authorities Out-turn report), the ship discharged 1299 bags less than the manifested quantity. 3. On the basis of the Port Trust authorities out-turn report, a show cause notice was issued to the appellants calling upon them to show cause as to why penalty should not be imposed for the shortlanding of 1299 bags. In reply to the Show Cause Notice, the appellants explained that the ship had discharged excess quantity at Cochin, and if that excess quantity is taken into ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g aggrieved by the order of the Appellate Collector the appellants filed a Revision Petition before the Central Government which stood statutorily transferred to this Tribunal for being dealt with as appeal before it. 7. When the appeal was taken up for hearing this day, Shri Ajit Roy Mukherjee, Bar-at-Law, appeared for the appellants and contended that the Appellate Collector was solely unjustified in rejecting the appeal only on the ground that the out-turn report had not been amended. He further contended that the Appellate Collector ought to have relied upon the Survey Report of M/s. J. B. Boda Marine and General Survey Agencies Private Limited, and should have held that the short landing was only 375 bags and not 968 bags. It was urg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fore the Deputy Collector. He further contended that as between the Out-turn report issued by the Port Trust authorities and the survey report of a private surveyor, the former should prevail. Finally, he urged that nothing prevented the appellants from adducing reliable evidences by production of amended Out-turn report or landing receipt from the Port Trust authorities. 9. Having regard to the rival contentions, the one and the only point that arises for consideration is whether the order of the Appellate Collector requires to be interfered with. 10. From the narration of the facts, it is clear that the appellants case has not been consistent. Before the Dy. Collector they had stated that 331 bags should be deducted from 1299 bags. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing to the appellants, the Food Corporation of India acted as the Agent for CARE in respect of this consignment. When that was so, the appellants at least could have produced a letter from the F.C.I. as to the number of bags received by them. No such letter has been produced. In the circumstances, if the Appellate Collector has not placed reliance on the survey report, it cannot be said that he committed any error. The Port Trust authority is a statutory body and until it is shown that the Out-turn report issued by the said statutory body is incorrect, we think we should prefer that report to the Survey Report to which neither the Port Trust nor the Customs is a party. 13. On careful consideration of all aspects, we see no merit in this a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
