9911796707
TMI Blog1993 (4) TMI 134X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... G.L. Rawal, learned Advocate has appeared on behalf of the applicants with Shri Kuljeet Rawal. Shri G.L. Rawal, learned Advocate pleaded that the appellants had imported 68 cartons of video magnetic tapes each containing jumbo rolls of 14,000 ft. length with the declared value of Rs. 1,65,159/- @ 725 Hongkong dollars per roll by bill of entry No. 1467/59, dated 5-8-1991 and 100 cartons each containing 10,000 ft. length were also imported vide bill of entry No. 1917/99, dated 28-10-1991 and the declared value was Rs. 1,74,672/- @ 520 per Hongkong dollar. Learned Advocate pleaded that the assessed value of rolls containing 14,000 ft. length is 1450 per Hongkong dollar per roll and 1050 per roll for cartons containing 10,000 ft. length and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the company M/s. Zoom Films is about Rs. 20,000/-. Shri Pramod B. Aggarwal is about Rs. 2,000/- to Rs. 2500/- per month and Shri Jyoti Kumar Aggarwal is also Rs. 2000/- to Rs. 2500/- per month. Besides, the time gap in respect of contemporaneous goods, the goods are different too, and no reliance can be placed on the same. Shri Rawal in support of his argument, referred to a decision in the case of Shri Pramod B. Agarwal vide Stay Order No. 293/92-A, dated 10-7-1992. He pleaded that the facts are similar and stay was granted in that case. He pleaded for the grant of stay. Mrs. C.G. Lal, learned SDR has appeared on behalf of the respondent. She pleaded that in the judgment cited by the learned Advocate, there was no mis-declaration, and as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tement within 8 hours and no reliance should be placed on the statement made by Shri Pramod Agarwal and regarding other statements, he argued that prima facie on merits, he has got a good case, and stay should be granted. 3. We have heard both sides and have gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. We have looked into the examination report of Hindustan Photo Films and also gone through the other observations in respect of one bill of entry No. 1467/59, dated 5-8-1991. The length is much more than the declared per roll. Both sides have cited the case law on the subject. The issue is contentious and arguable. We have also looked into the financial position of the applicants. As per provisional Balance Sheet of the appellants f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uld amount to undue hardship. We dispense with the pre-deposit of the same on the condition on M/s. Zoom Films to deposit Rs. 30,000/-, Shri Pramod B. Agarwal Rs. 20,000/-. In respect of Shri Jyoti Kumar Agarwal, we dispense with the whole amount of pre-deposit. We order that the applicants should deposit the above amounts within 10 weeks from today and report compliance of the same to the Tribunal within 11 weeks. We further order that during the pendency of the appeal, the revenue authorities shall not pursue the recovery proceedings for the balance amount of penalty. In case the applicants fail to comply with the terms of this Order, this stay Order shall stand automatically vacated. 4. During the course of hearing, learned Advocate, S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
