9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (5) TMI 462X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stigations were made and on adjudication, motor-cycle was confiscated but allowed to be redeemed on payment of redemption fine and penalty was also imposed on the importer, present claimant, show room owner and on the person who dealt with the motor-cycle. Aggrieved against the aforesaid order, these 4 appeals are filed. Since all the appeals have originated from the same order-in-original, so all the cases are taken up together for disposal. 3.At the time of personal hearing, the Counsel of the appellant stated that it was due to improper or faulty checking at the time of import of the motor cycle chassis no. was wrongly mentioned in the bill of entry and the same mistake occurred at the time of registration, otherwise motor-cycle was le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aisal Babu Palapatty, where chassis no. as well as engine no. was shown as LWOXCKLD 620062062. Since the chassis no. found on the motor cycle did not tally with the chassis no. given in the bill of entry, and no one could produce any document showing the legal import, so it was concluded that it was not the same motor cycle which had been imported under the aforesaid bill of entry. The chassis no. and engine no. given in the affidavit filed at the time of importation by the appellant, is exactly same, which on the face of it appears to be wrong because these two nos. cannot be the same for the same motor cycles so it gives the indication that at the time of importation, chassis no. mentioned in the bill of entry as well as in the affidavit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o bearing in the assessment of the goods then on such mistake case cannot be re-opened and goods cannot be confiscated. Further, by giving the wrong information neither appellant has benefited nor deptt. has lost any amount, because for the purpose of proper classification and valuation, chassis no. or engine no. has no relevance, hence, deptt. cannot seize and confiscate the motor cycle for giving unintentionally wrong chassis no., which deptt. has also failed to detect. If the bill of entry is found genuine and then the seized motor cycle is held to be the same as imported under the bill of entry, hence action of the deptt. is totally illegal. 6.The next allegation was that motor cycle was sold to Mr. Ramakant Shanbagh in violation of P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re of the appellant to produce the evidence goods cannot be confiscated. Further, as per instruction No. 394/184/92 Cus. As, dated 23-2-93 issued by Board in case of non-notified goods, burden is on the deptt. to produce evidence that goods were illegally imported and not the person from whose possession such goods are seized and such instruction are binding on the deptt. Further this issue as discussed in detail order-in-appeal No. 18/2004 which has already been accepted by the deptt., hence discussion and the ratio of the aforesaid judgment should be read in this case also. 8.Since the motor cycle are held to be legally imported hence, penalty cannot be imposed on other notice who dealt the motor cycles in any manner after it's import. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
