9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (5) TMI 904X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hri Babloo Sinha, employee of the courier company, was present, who could not disclose much about the said silk yarn, but submitted that the same had been received from Bangalore Office. During the search operation itself, Shri Babloo Sinha contacted his head office situated at Varanasi and some records relating to import of silk yarn were forwarded through FAX. From these records, it was revealed that the importation of silk yarn in question had taken place in the year, 1995 under D.E.E.C. Scheme. The officers, however, on a reasonable belief that the silk yarn in question was smuggled, but seized the same. 2. During investigations, statements of various persons were recorded and enquiries were conducted at various places. Shri Prakash C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r two years and finally, send the same to a far-off place at Bhagalpur for getting the same converted into fabrics. From this, he concluded that this yarn in question was not the same which was imported by the appellants. Accordingly, he confiscated the same absolutely and also imposed a personal penalty of Rs. 1.00 lakh on Shri Prakash Chandra, Proprietor of M/s. Prakash Silk Mills, Banagalore. Personal Penalty of Rs. 50,000.00 has also been imposed upon Shri Atma Ram Maheshka, Bhagalpur from whom the goods were seized for weaving purposes on the gound that he played an active role in creating the story supporting Shri Prakash Chandra. 4. Shri S.R. Dutta, Consultant for Appeal No. C-263/99 and Shri S. Dasgupta, learned Advocate for Appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... identify any imported goods at the time of clearance or even at a later stage. The weight, quantity, size of the packets and description of the goods etc. were duly tallying with the imported goods and as such, it was not open to the adjudicating authority to conclude that the seized yarn was not the same which was imported by the appellants in the year, 1995. Similarly, the observation of the adjudicating authority that nobody would send the gods to a far-off place like Bhagalpur, is in the nature of assumption and presumption inasmuch as the appellant Prakash Chandra was free to send the goods to any palce in India for weaving purposes and Bhagalpur Weavers Company being known for weaving, the goods were sent to the appellant, Atma Ram ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . However, the adjudicating authority has not specified as to how many cartons were not carrying the same numbers. A logical criterion to this observation is that quite a good number of cartons were having the same numbers which were reflected in the bills of entry. No reasons have been given by the adjudicating authority for holding the same as illegally imported. On the contrary, we find that the appellants have produced on record a number of evidence which tilts the cases in their favour. It has been shown to us that initially 3200 Kgs. of silk yarn were imported, out of which 2000 Kgs. were sent to the weavers and 1200 Kgs. were still lying with Shri Prakash Chandra at his premises in Bangalore, which was also verified by the Officers. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
