9911796707
TMI Blog1996 (8) TMI 343X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 85 that SSF, their Indenting Agents and their Adviser had collectively acted in collusion and had mis-declared the value of the consignment of the goods imported. The Collector of Customs (Appeals) had held that on the basis of the evidence relied upon the Department, there was no justification for either enhancing the value of the goods imported for assessment to customs duty, or for imposing any fine. 2. M/s. SSF had imported Mild Steel Galvanised Low Carbon Defective Sheets in Coil form ( sheets for short) from M/s. K. Tamura Co., Osaka, Japan (Japanese suppliers) vide Bill of Entry, dated 20-8-1985, at the port of Madras. The sheets were imported through M/s. S.N. Sinha Co. (Impex) Pvt. Ltd., Bombay (Indenting Agents). On the bas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... N.C. Sogani, Consultant submitted that the debit note relied upon did not relate to the respondents. Referring to the copy of the debit note supplied to them, he stated that the particulars as contained in the said debit note did not tally with the particulars of the consignment imported by the respondents. The statement of Shri S.N. Sinha, Managing Director of the Indenting Agents Firm was recorded with reference to such a debit note which did not relate to the respondents. There was nothing in his statement to show that any additional sums had been paid by the respondents. He pleaded that the declared value could not be discarded on the basis of un-related documents and statement recorded with reference to such un-related documents. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) Officers from, the premises of the Indenting agents, and a revised show cause notice was issued on 25-11-1985 alleging, in addition, under-valuation also. 6. The case of the Revenue is based on the copy of the debit note referred to above bearing No. KTD-202/SN/85, dated 30-8-1985 of the Japanese suppliers, recovered from the premises of the Indenting Agents, The respondents have contended that this debit note did not relate to them and was a mistake on the part of the Japanese suppliers and subsequently they had recalled the said debit note from the Indenting Agents. On scrutiny of the copy of the debit note, it is seen that the various entries therein do not tally with the particulars of the import under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the correct value of the goods imported was higher than the one shown in the invoice. On this basis alone, the declared value could not be rejected. The relevancy of the debit note with reference to which the statement of Shri Sinha was recorded, is not established. No investigations had been made as to what should be the value for Customs purposes under Customs law. As the debit note did not contain particulars of the present import, adoption of its value without any verification may not be proper. No other basis had been given by the Dy. Collector, Customs to adopt the value shown in such a debit note. 8. As regards the controversy about the bill of exchange for US $ 1980.04, the respondents had submitted that indent was placed on CIF ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
