9911796707
TMI Blog1988 (9) TMI 182X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... This is a case of import of 1682.5 gross main springs for wrist watches as against declared description of High Carbon Steel Strips. 3. We have heard Shri S.D. Nankani, advocate for the appellants and Shri A.S. Sunder Rajan, JDR, for the department. 4. The department s case is that as a result of an information received by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, the residential premises of both the partners of the appellant company were searched on 16-2-1979 and some incriminating documents were seized. Thereafter, the packages in question were examined. While two of the three packages were found to contain goods as declared viz. steel strips, the third package was found to contain main springs of wrist watches. In lieu of 183 Kgs. of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellants had acted in deliberate violation of law. Action was taken by the department in accordance with intelligence received. Highly incriminating documents were seized from the residence of the partners. It is established that the importer went abroad and it was only shortly after his visit that the goods were despatched. It is also submitted that there was deliberate mis-declaration in respect of the goods imported, as the description correctly answered goods in only two packages. 9. We have carefully considered the facts of the case and the submissions made before us. We queried from the learned advocate repeatedly as to how he would satisfy us that the exports of the main springs alongwith the stainless steel strips were undertaken b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt on 15-3-1979 that appellants realised that it would be necessary to ask the suppliers to explain in order to strengthen their claim that they were not involved in the illicit Imports. 11. We also find that the documents recovered from the premises of the appellants, including a diary and the letters, are highly incriminating and there is no satisfactory explanation in regard to them. 12. Now, coming to the question of valuation, we find that the department has taken into consideration two proforma invoice of M/s. Fabrique De Ressorts Pour Montres. These two invoices have been held by the department to be relateable to the importer order of 14-12-1977. It is observed that when queried about this, Shri Hakim had stated that he did not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... threat held out to them. It is submitted that there is no finding of the Collector that it is false. It should, therefore, be considered on its own merits, it is submitted. We find this submission very strange and wholly untenable. Appellants have not challenged the factual accuracy of what is recorded in regard to this letter of 28-3-1979 in the order of the Collector of Customs. It is quite clear that on production of the documents before him, the Collector had taken the view that the document was false. He also put it to the appellants that if they insisted on relying on the document, they should be prepared to face any action that the department might take, including prosecution for production of a false document before an officer of C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
