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

1990 (7) TMI 228

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 3518/87-NRB filed by the respondents Shri P.C. Agarwal against the present applicant - 1. What had prevented the Respondent from placing on the record of Appeal, the Show Cause Notices issued ? Whether the apprisal of the results of enquiries and investigations as also all the evidence on record militates against the version of the Respondent ? 2. Whether a party can hold out goods as MADE FROM GERMANY conveying the imported nature of ingredient to the public at large but take a different stand in the Departmental proceedings ? 3. Whether or not the reliance could be placed on shifting nature of defence pleas from time to time made by the Respondent ? 4. Whether or not the story of the defence is false in view of the BOGUS BILLS .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... erein - vide his Order-in-Original No. 1-Cus/Collr/87 dated 14-9-1987 ordered for the confiscation of the seized goods under Section 3(2) of Import Export (Control) Act, 1947 read with Section 111 (d) of the Customs Act, 1962 with an option to M/s. Standard Chemical and Biological Manufacturing Co., Nagpur to redeem the same on payment of a fine of Rs. one lakh with duty at the appropriate rate and also imposed a personal penalty of Rs. 1 lakh on Shri P.C. Agarwal, Prop. M/s. Standard Chemicals Biological Manufacturing Co., Nagpur. Aggrieved by the said adjudication order the respondents filed his appeal bearing No. C/3518/87-NRB before the Tribunal which was allowed by it vide its Order No. A/438/89-NRB dated 31-10-1989 inter alia hold .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... copies of the documents on which they rely upon for the purpose of appeal. There is no compulsion on either party to file a particular document except the impugned orders until and unless specifically called for by the Tribunal in the interest of justice. If in the instant case copy of the show cause notice issued to the respondent was not filed by him in his appeal the Collector of Customs and Central Excise, the applicant herein could have filed the same at the time of hearing of appeal on merits. Moreover there is a virtual reproduction of the show cause notice in the Order-in-Original passed by the Collector of Customs and Central Excise and the same was referred to by both the parties at the time of hearing of the appeal on merits and .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e was found in containers which bore labels indicating the origin of the chemical as Made from Germany . The labels were torn in some cases and the cap on which the containers was fitted was not a pilfer-proof cap and the same was fixed by adhesive tapes. The appellant claims that it was indigenous Polladium Chloride repacked in the containers having a foreign label. Will this alone provide sufficient proof that it was of foreign origin ? The supplier of the chemical to the appellant has not been interrogated, as he was not available, in which case how has the Department come to the conclusion that it was imported into India, without payment of duty ? The material which was exhibited during the hearing was found to be in containers, and it .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... question No. 6 - 9. This question also relates to the appreciation of the evidence on record. The non-production of the importer or the person who supplied the goods to the respondent may be a circumstance against the respondent but that by itself is not sufficient to hold that the subject goods were of foreign origin or they were smuggled, more particularly, when he was reported to be untraceable. This circumstance was also taken note of by the Tribunal while appreciating the entire evidence on the record both documentary and circumstantial as could be seen from para 8 of the order as reproduced above. Hence this question is also not referable. As regards question No. 7 - 10. This question is also not referable and appears to have be .....

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