Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1998 (10) TMI 304

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , New Custom House, Mumbai. Two consignments were imported by appellant Hoshiar Purian-Di Hatti valued at Rs. 20,90,709/- and Rs. 17,06,018/-, and the third consignment imported by appellant M/s. Swift Seed International was valued at Rs. 19,62,029/- CIF. The Bills of Entry filed by the appellants were taken up in the first week of August, 1996 and the goods were examined and the Custom House noted thereupon that the description of the goods in all these cases was declared in the relevant Bills of Entry as the Amaranthus Seeds. The appellants had also submitted import permits from the Deputy Director (Entomology) of Plant Quarantine Fumigation Station, Mumbai. In one of the import permits produced by appellant M/s. Hoshiar Purian-Di Hatti .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... er saying that the consignment was found not accompanied by the documents namely Import permit, and, thereafter by a letter dated 3-10-1996 informed the party that the permits produced for the import were not valid to cover the same. The appellants thereafter wrote to the Commissioner of Customs on 3-10-1996 waiving the issue of formal written show cause notice and seeking adjudication to the case. The Commissioner of Customs found that import of seeds is restricted as per Para 156-D(4) of the EXIM Policy, 1992-97. The restriction on seeds of fodder for sowing is as that import is permitted without licence subject to fulfillment of the provisions of new Policy on Seed Development, in 1988, and in accordance with a permit for import granted .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of M/s. Hoshiar Purian-Di Hatti to the effect there they had knowingly obtained the import permit from the Agricultural Ministry for importing clover seeds in the guise of Amaranthus Seeds. In their case similarly the Plant and Quarantine Dy. Director by a letter dated 17-10-1996 informed appellant that the consignment was not covered by the import permit produced by him. The Commissioner similarly adjudicated the case as in the case of the other appellants and held the goods to be confiscable and levied a redemption fine of Rs. 9,50,000/- and imposed penalty of Rs. 1,75,000/- on appellant M/s. Swift Seeds International. 3. Shri V.K. Jain the ld. Chartered Accountant represented the appellants and submitted that none of these appellants .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... lso certificate produced from the Egyptian authority. In one of which the Botanical name Amaranthus Seeds Trifelion Alexandrium was given which accords with the CTA sub-heading description 1209.22. In any case, the ld. C.A. pleaded the redemption fine imposed for the goods is much more than the profit earned by the appellant Hoshiar Purian-Di Hatti in this case. The audit report for the period ending 31-3-1997 of this appellant was produced wherein it is shown in the Trading Account that the profit from the imports was Rs. 8,50,310/- and the C.A. further submitted that if the amount of Rs. 22,50,000/- which is also indicated in the balance as due from Customs is considered, there will be a net loss for the appellant. The ld. C.A. therefore .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... . In these circumstances the charge for misdeclaration of the goods cannot be said to have been satisfactorily established. 6. On the question of the validity of the import, the appellants, while seeking adjudication of the case without issue of show cause notice, have admitted that the import is not covered by the permits produced by them. The intimation to the appellants from the Dy. Director (Plant Quarantine) saying that the consignment is not covered by the import permits produced by the appellants totally goes against them. The above finding has been given by the PFO after drawing samples in the consignment and detaining the same, and the communication is that the detention was ordered by the PFO because the import permits produce .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates