9911796707
TMI Blog1987 (2) TMI 357X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... found that he had brought excess goods valued Rs. 20,200/-. In addition, goods worth Rs. 8,850/- were found in his packages which he did not clear in his baggage declaration form dated 22.6.79 filed by him. The goods could have been cleared under the transfer of residence concession provided it .was established that the appellant had possessed and used the goods abroad for at least one year. The appellant produced 8 purchase receipts before the authorities as evidence of possession. However, examination of the goods by the Superintendent of Customs revealed that the goods were new and not used. The appellant contested this finding before the adjudicating Additional Collector. The Additional Collector desired to re-examine the goods personal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ave heard both sides and have considered the matter carefully. The appellant produced ten original purchase receipts before us. One of them is in his wife's name, one in his son's name and the rest are in his own name. Of them, three relate to the articles which were not declared at all by the appellant. These articles are (1) Pioneer Stereo Receiver; (2) National Television; and glassware. All these were major items of substantial value. These were not miscellaneous articles of a sundry nature. The appellant ought to have declared them as he declared a large number of similar other articles. Non-declaration of the articles itself is an offence under Section 111(1) of the Customs Act, 1962 and un-declared articles are liable to confiscation ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5. The appellant also faintly pleaded that value of the articles assessed by the customs should be revised so as to give him benefit of depreciation in value of the used articles. We observe that valuation of any of the articles was not contested by the appellant before the original authority, nor before the Board, nor even in the written Revision Application filed before the Central Government (now the present appeal before us). The argument has been put forth for the first time at the time of hearing before this Tribunal. As to what should be the value of an article, is a mixed question of fact and law. The Additional Collector had offered an opportunity of re-examination of the goods to the appellant but the appellant did not avail of it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
