9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (10) TMI 679X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... umes, cordless phones, calculators and other miscellaneous goods and filed bills of entry No. 118 on 7-5-2002. The goods were examined in the presence of DRI Officers and orders were made for verification of the prices declared in association with the Directorate of Valuation. The value of the goods was increased, the bill of entry was assessed and concurrently audited. Thereafter the statement of the proprietor of the importing concern namely, Kenya was recorded. He claimed to be a front man for others, which was one Rashid Shaik in the present consignment. He confessed ignorance about the aspect of valuation Rashid Shaik in his statement admitted under invoicing. His brother in Dubai would pay full price in Dubai but would receive invoice ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he case of Collector of Customs, Cochin v. Arvind Export (P) Ltd. [2001 (130) E.L.T. 54 (Trib.-LB). His second grievance was that the material on which the value was proposed further to be enhanced, had not been disclosed by the department. He stated that where the issue of a written notice was payable the importer was still entitled to know the charges against him and the grounds on which the charges was made. He stated that the Commissioner referred to certain work sheets, these were not shown to him before the order was passed. Subsequent to the receipt of the data, he found that even where the value of identical goods was available, the DRI officers had mutilated that entry and had adopted the value of another model of VCD. He stated th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sue of notice, states that such notice may be oral if so desired by the noticee. Therefore where the issue of written show cause notice is waived it is mandatory on part of the adjudicating authority to disclose to the offender the action proposed as also the grounds on which the action is proposed. In the present case the material on which the escalation was proposed as also the quantum of escalation, was not disclosed to the appellants. Therefore, the appellants were deprived of the opportunity to state their case. This denial of natural justice renders the orders of escalation of confiscation as also the imposition of penalty in the case of goods imported under Bill of Entry No. 118 untenable. This is laid down by the Tribunal in their j ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
