9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (4) TMI 197X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e licit acquisition and possession of the imported goods. Later at the stage of adjudication, the appellant took a plea that the watches of foreign origin were purchased from passengers who had cleared them on payment of duty and the watches fixed with foreign origin movements were assembled in India. The appellant repeated the plea before the Commissioner (Appeals) also. The authorities below did not accept the contention of the appellant and the Com- missioner (Appeals) in the impugned order observed that both wrist watches and watch movements are notified items under Section 11 of the Customs Act and they are also covered under Section 123 of the Customs Act. Therefore, the onus was on the appellant to prove the licit importation of such ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... djudicating authority as well as the first Appellate Authority had not taken into account the said documents and had not given any finding as to why the said documents should not be relied upon except the observations made by the Commissioner (Appeals) stating that the appellants should have kept the record of the documents and produced them before the Seizing Officer. Ld. Counsel had also drawn and relied upon the Tribunal s decision in Standard Watch Company v. Collector of Customs reported in 1990 (47) E.L.T. 571 in which Tribunal had observed that merely because movements of watches were of foreign origin, watches assembled in India with movements of watches of foreign origin cannot be considered to be the wrist watches of foreign origi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... attention to the fact that the cash memo issued by the Central Excise Retail Shop produced by the appellants as proof of import of watch movements by pointing out the said cash memo is dated 7-6-1991 wheras the seizure had taken place on 28-7-1995. As regards the case law relied on by the appellant, ld. JDR submitted that there was no dispute in the present case as to whether the watches assembled in India with foreign watch movements were to be considered as watches of foreign origin. The issue here was that both the watches and watch movements were prohibited items under Section 11 of the Customs Act items whose import is regulated under Section 123 of the Customs Act. It was incumbent on any person possessing goods covered by the said S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e appellant, I find that the authorities below have not given any legally satisfactory reason for rejecting the evidence produced by the appellant. In these circumstances, the appellant is entitled to the benefit of doubt. Accordingly, I set aside the impugned order. I direct the authorities below to allow redemption of the watches on payment of appropriate redemption fine calculated on the basis of relevant rules and procedure. In the circumstances of the case, I also feel that the penalty imposed is uncalled for. The same is also set aside. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms. At this stage, ld. Counsel brings to my notice that the appellant had deposited Rs. 5,000/- at the stage of First Appellate proceedings. This will also be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
