9911796707
TMI Blog1995 (6) TMI 138X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... personal penalty of Rs. 20,000/- on the appellant. 2. The appellants filed a shipping bill for export of tyres and tubes and declared a specific weight against those items. However, on verification, in so far as tyres with tubes were concerned, the weight was short by 742.50 kgs whereas the tubes were short by 1162.50 kgs though number-wise both the items tally with declaration made in the shipping bill. The appellants when asked to explain the same came forward with a plea that the difference in the weight showed a consistent shortage to the extent of 872 gms per bundle which could be due to some malfunctioning of their weighing scale. They submitted that they had otherwise declared the items correctly so far as the number of tyres and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n his submission, the duty at the best, said to have been evaded, would come to only Rs. 17,000. In his submission the present consignment was under DEEC scheme on the prior export basis and that the appellants had earlier already exported certain consignments and taking them together, the total quantity of tyres and tubes already exported comes to 156544.400 kgs against that DEEC licence mentioning a quantity of 147770 kgs and if the entire aspect is considered in its totality, the difference in weight as indicated in the particular shipping bill could be of no significance. He has submitted that all these datas were produced before the Collector (Appeals) who has not taken into consideration the same and that the Collector (Appeals) has c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... called for in as much as the same relates to attempted export of the goods contrary to any prohibition made under the Act or any other law for the time being in force. Here no prohibition is imposed against the export of the tyres and tubes. In any case, there is an element of misdeclaration in the shipping bill as to the total weight though of a negligible quantity as has been indicated earlier. When the licence is issued on the prior export basis permitting under DEEC scheme, the question that calls for examination is, whether, the appellants have earlier exported the quantity weightwise more than the one specified in the licence. The appellants have come with the positive claim that they have already effected export of tyres and tubes t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
