9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (3) TMI 510X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pc under Rule 8 of the CVR, 1988 and also ordered confiscation of the goods with option to redeem the same on payment of a fine of Rs. 60,00,000/-. Bank guarantee executed by the importers has also been ordered to be enforced to appropriate the duty and penalty amount. A penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/- has also been imposed on the appellants Company. The Commissioner has also imposed personal penalty of Rs. 25,000/- each on the other appellants. 2. This is the second round of appeal before the Tribunal as the matter was once remanded back for de novo consideration vide CEGAT Order No. 2301 to 2305 dated 30-10-98 by which the adjudicating authority was directed to supply documents sought for by the appellants and then pass an order after affordi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... red for sale by the foreign supplier by fax and the price paid by the importer after negotiation. The offer addressed to one M/s. Label Garments Co. Ltd cannot be relied upon as the name and address of that company was not available and the so-called offer was also not signed. The fax message of offer was also interpolated to read as General Brand Air Conditioners for Indian Market . (c) The price as US $ 352 CIF Bombay mentioned in the certificate dated 20-9-97 of Fujitsu General Limited does not specifically indicate whether it is per piece or not. (d) Bill of Entry No. 7861 dated 19-8-97 and Invoice No. Exp. 48 for the identical goods imported by M/s. Riddhi Impex, Ahmedabad relied upon by the department was not enclosed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tting aside the impugned order and allowing all the three appeals. 6. Shri A Jayachandran, learned DR appearing for the Revenue defended the impugned order and sought for dismissal of the appeals. He has invited our attention to the finding portion of the impugned order wherein the Commissioner has dealt with each plea raised by the Counsel for the appellants before him and the Commissioner has passed a well reasoned order and the same needs to be sustained. 7. We have considered the rival submission and gone through the case records. We observe that in this case the Commissioner has relied upon the price and quantity of an import of 96 pieces of identical goods made in August 1997 through the Bombay Port with the price and quantity of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
