9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (7) TMI 568X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hium, JDR, for the Respondent. [Order]. - Heard Shri K.P. Dey, Advocate for the Appellant and Shri J.R. Madhium, JDR for the Revenue. This appeal has been filed against the order of Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise (Appeals), Kolkata dated 16-7-2003. In brief facts of the case are that on 23-5-2001 at about 14.30 hours the Custom Officers of Panitanki P.U. intercepted 03 (three) rickshaw ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ents he did not handover the documents to the illiterate rickshaw van pullers. The fertilizers and medicines belong to one Shri Tapas Sengupta of Sukanta Nagar, Siliguri, a representative of M/s. Karnataka Agro-Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Multiplex who requested him to export those goods to Nepal and rest goods belong to him. He further stated that he was holding an Export License and is liable f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ods belong to the appellant. There was no rebuttal against it and goods ought to have been returned to the appellant. Mere seizure of the goods near border will not make them liable to be confiscated. He submits that the appellant has established his ownership over the goods and the same may be returned to the appellant. He submits that the appeal may be allowed. In reply, the Learned JDR has supp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... veals that the appellant tried to fabricate and manipulate the documents for showing his ownership over the seized goods. Had there been any ownership documents with the appellant that could have been produced before the Customs Authority on the very day of seizure. It took 09 (nine) days to produce such document and on an inspection by the competent authority it revealed that they were fabricated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
