Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1988 (10) TMI 233

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... State Transport Bus coming from Bombay on 7-9-1982. On examination of his baggage the officers recovered watch movements, spare parts of the watches and cells of the electronic watches all of foreign origin valued at Rs. 84,360/-. -At the time of interception of the appellant along with the watch movements, the appellant produced photo copies of four bills/challans, namely challan No. 1470 dated 8-4-1982, bill No. 1412 dated 17-4-1982, bill No. nil dated 10-7-1974 and letter dated 15-2-1985 certifying the true copy of the bill 00125 dated 2-3-1979 issued by Shah Manufacturing Corporation, Bombay, Nita Sales Corporation, Bombay and Aero Time, Bombay. The appellant revealed that these are the documents purported to cover the legal acquisitio .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ained that he could not contact the broker so far from whom he had purchased some watch movement and he, will produce the original bills within a few days. However, in his further statement dated 13-12-1982 the appellant stated that while confirming the correctness of the earlier statements, he indicated that he has handed over his case to his advocate along with the original bills old as well as new and therefore he was not in a position to produce the same. The Department also verified the watch movements under seizure to get the expert opinion thereon. This verification has been done under a panchnama drawn on 5-1-1983. As per the experts, contention all the watch movements are of ST 96 N Calibre, the winding stems of all the movements a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... atter of common knowledge that these watch movements are allowed import to Actual Users and they are also diverted; plenty of watch movements thus find way to the market. The Addl. Collector is therefore, not justified is coming to the conclusion that the watch movements are smuggled ones, and hence ordering confiscation thereof under Section lll(d) and imposing penalty on the appellant are not sustainable. In this context, he referred to the judgment of the West Regional Bench reported in E.L.T. 1988 (37) E.L.T. 411 (Tribunal) Mrs. Mohini Arjundas Mansukhani v. Collector of Customs Central Excise. He also referred to the judgment passed in the Criminal Application Nos. 236 237 of 1977 in a COFEPOSA detention case. Shri Parekh argued th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nder seizure. He also cited the expert s opinion obtained in this regard. He, therefore, pleaded that the order of confiscation and imposition of penalty are correct in law and in this context he sought to rely on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Bhoormal s case. 4. We have considered the arguments made from both the sides. It is on record that the appellant, while travelling with watch movement of foreign origin were carrying some photo-copies of bills and challans and he produced them as covering a part of the watch movement under seizure. He also claims that 150 watch movement have been taken out of 200 watches bought by him under a proper voucher. He also claims that some of the watch movements have been purchased from a broker on .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ert opinion. As we observe the initial burden of the Department has there been shifted on the appellant which they have not discharged. The citations made by the learned Advocate are, in our opinion, of not much relevance to this case in question. In the case dealt with by this Bench in Order No. 532/88 WRB, dated 21-3-1988 [1988 (37) E.L.T. 411], the issue involved was seizure of goods from the residential premises where they were claimed to have kept for personal use and the seized goods in this case were claimed to be covered by Baggage Receipt, where the baggage receipts were neither dis-proved nor found to be not covering the goods. Hence it was held by this Bench that the Department has not satisfactorily discharged the burden for arr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates