9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (6) TMI 138X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that no Bill of Entry was filed for clearing the goods. 4. It was their contention that they had not placed any indent with M/s. Novel and Novice Textiles, Amsterdom who were the suppliers in this case; and that the consignment had no connection with them. In this respect he would draw attention to the correspondence marked as Annexure C . 5. The appellants had also filed an affidavit denying the import of consignment by their firm. 6. The Additional Collector has further imposed a personal penalty of Rs. 50,000/- on them (besides confiscating the consignment). 7. He stated that they have got a good prima facie case, and are financially hard up and not in a position to deposit the penalty. Hence the prayer. 8. The learned S.D.R. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er, the learned Counsel has drawn our attention to the correspondence with the Punjab National Bank, Amritsar and to their letter dated 15-12-89 addressed to the Additional Collector of Customs. In the letter dated 15-12-89 it has been mentioned that, We have not booked any Indent for supply of one container of old synthetic rags completely pre-mutilated with M/s. Novel and Novice Textiles, Amsterdom and for which documents were presented on 9-6-1987 through Punjab National Bank, Overseas Branch, Hall Bazar, Amritsar. The documents presented through the Bank were returned as our firm has not placed any Indent with the said supplier. No payment has been made by us for the said consignment and we are not concerned with the Import of said c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... epartment to take recourse of Section 48. 20. In so far as the present case is concerned, since the goods had been manifested in the name of the appellants and consigned to them, therefore, there was some probability that the goods were meant to be delivered to the appellants. However, at the same time the appellant had not retired the documents and the department had not cared to verify the correctness of their statement that no payment had been made. Therefore, the matter was in any eventuality not free from doubt and the benefit of doubt goes to the appellants. 21. Since the appellants have not claimed the goods and have not contested their confiscation, therefore, we need not enter into the merits of the case in so far as it relates ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
