9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (7) TMI 349X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nstant case placed orders for supply of Furazolidone BP 80 and Theophylline Anhydrous BP 80. The goods came by air and Bill of Entry dated 1-11-1993 was filed for clearance of the goods; that clearance of goods was allowed by endorsing the Bill of Entry `out of Customs charge ; that the goods were detained while being taken on 2-11-1993 on the ground that some investigations are required. He submits that since they came to know that there might be a mixup in the supply, they contacted their Hongkong Supplier on 8-11-1993 and received reply through a fax message dated 8-11-1993 stating that a mistake had occurred in the Supplier s Warehouse; that due to new staff at the warehouse, they have exchanged the drums and have wrongly sent to appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... abandoned the goods and since the goods were abandoned, there was no question of levy of any penalty on the firm or other personnel of the firm. 2. The ld. Counsel very strongly putforth the point of denial of natural justice. He submits that the charges were not explained to the Appellants, that the Show Cause Notice was waived only in respect of the Firm and not in respect of others, that not only the Firm, but also S/Shri V.K. Jain, Simon J. Paul and S.K. Bose have been penalised with different amounts. He submits that since no opportunity was given to the appellants nor the appellants had waived the issue of show cause notice nor were they given an opportunity of being heard in person, therefore, the imposition of penalty on the abov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the statement of the Appellants that they were actual users inasmuch as it was admitted by Shri V.K. Jain that earlier also they had sold the goods in the open market and that no accounts were maintained in the factory. He submitted that the two persons, viz. Shri Simon J. Paul and Shri S.K. Bose also testified that on earlier occasions after clearance of the goods, the same were not delivered to their factory in Faridabad, but were actually delivered in Delhi. The ld. SDR submitted that all these facts when put together clearly indicate that there was no mixup and that the mixup indicated in the basis of the fax message was clearly an afterthought. On the question of imposition of penalty, the ld. SDR submitted that all the 4 persons were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... idence placed before us, we do not see anything to prove that they participated in the personal hearing. In the absence of show cause notices issued to these persons or waiver thereof, we set aside the order of imposition of penalty on Shri Simon J. Paul and Shri S.K. Bose. 6. The second issue is whether the declaration in the Bill of Entry was a mis-declaration or whether such a mis-declaration was intentional. From the evidence on record and the submissions made before us, we find that there was specific information. We also note that the goods were detained before the appellant submitted a copy of the fax message from the foreign supplier indicating that there was a mixup and the consignment meant for Germany has been sent to India. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
