9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (5) TMI 151X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... J.P. Singh and K.P. Singh, Partners in M/s. Hari Impex. The other appellant, Shri V.S. Raghvan, has also been imposed a penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs. 2. The case of the Department against the present appellants is that they had attempted to export Printed Circuit Boards (P.C. Boards) by showing grossly over valued price. The F.O.B. value shown in the 16 shipping bills was Rs. 440-445/- per PCB whereas market inquiry revealed that the value of PCB was only Rs. 40/-. Since common issues were involved and the appeals arise from the same impugned order all the four appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 3. Shri Harbans Singh, ld. Counsel, appeared for Shri Hari Impex and the two Partners. Shri V.S. Raghvan, a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y four corrigendum notices) was issued alleging that the said PCBs were infact meant for being used in black and white TVs and that the prices of each PCB did not exceed the range of Rs. 30/- to Rs. 40/- per piece. It was alleged that the Customs House clearing agents and others who acted as intermediaries were aware of over-invoicing and they were charging high commissions to enable the exporters to export the goods and to obtain drawback on the declared value. Appellants were called upon to show cause why the goods should not be confiscated under Section 113(d) and (i) of the Customs Act and why the drawback claim in terms of provisions of Section 76(1)(b) should not be disallowed on the ground that the market price of the goods determine ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... attempt of export of PCBs, mis-declaring their value with intent to claim higher amounts of drawback. 7. Shri Harbans Singh, ld. Counsel submitted that the reliance placed by the Department on the opinions given by three dealers in electronics (copies at pages 55 to 59 of the Paper Book) do not state categorically that the samples which were inspected by them were the same as were drawn by the Department from the consignments marked for export by the appellants and detained by the Departmental Officer. He drew attention to the panchnama dated 21-1-1993 which only recorded that sealed samples in quadruplicate were drawn from packings covered by each shipping bill. He, therefore, submitted that it has not been established that the price men ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... certificate, they should have proved it by other competent evidence or by asking for their cross-examination. Since they have not done any such thing at the time of the adjudication, such points should not be raised at the appellate stage. As regards the involvement of Shri K.P. Singh, ld. JDR submitted that it was on record that he had gone to Bombay and had contacted various persons in connection with the attempted export of the impugned goods. 10. We have considered the submissions made before us and have gone through the records. The main appellant, M/s. Hari Impex have not been able to show any material which would cast doubt on the evidence relied on by the adjudicating authority. Though the ld. Counsel had disputed the veracity of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
