9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (9) TMI 474X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oms House, Bombay, detained sixteen export consignments of Printed Circuit Boards belonging to M/s. Hari Impex. The said consignments were covered by sixteen shipping bills under drawback claim. On investigation, it was found that the value of the goods declared by the said exporter was on the higher side. Statements of various persons were recorded on the basis of which proceedings were initiated against the exporter as also various other persons including the appellants herein. 3. The case against the appellant is that he had aided and abetted mis-declaration of the value of the goods by the exporter M/s. Hari Impex. The adjudicating authority, while finding the appellant guilty of offence has recorded as under :- He also did not res ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... documents for which he charged the commission. The above findings are based on the suspicion and conjectures inasmuch as the statements no where implicate the appellants and in any case being statements of co-noticees cannot be relied upon as a sole evidence and needs independent corroboration. There is not even a whisper in the said statements to the effect that the appellants had any knowledge of mis-declaration or over valuation of export consignments. The appellants is not expected to know any contravention committed by the exporter and cannot be expected to have any knowledge about all the consignments he handled as a forwarding agent. For the above proposition, he has relied upon the Tribunal s decision in the case of Shri R.P. Naray ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fact of his being aware of the over invoicing of the consignments in question. Even Shri J.P. Singh of M/s. Hari Impex in his communication to the department has not implicated the appellant. As such, we are of the view that there is no sufficient material on record to give an adverse finding against the appellants. The references made by the adjudicating authority to the various statements at the most lead to some doubt against the appellants. However, it is well settled principle of law that doubt, howsoever strong, cannot take place of evidence. As such, by extending the benefit of doubt to the appellants, we set aside the personal penalty imposed upon him and allow the appeal with consequential relief. (Pronounced in Court on ) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9-7-2005 8. [Order per : Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice-President]. - I have heard both sides on the point of difference referred to me. 9. The case of the Department against the appellant is based upon the statements of Shri V.T. Gaonkar to the effect that he used to get Rs. 500/- per shipping bill from the exporter M/s. Hari Impex, whose clearance work he got through the appellant, and Shri V.S. Raghavan to the effect that the appellant agreed to pay him and Shri Gaonkar Re. 1/- per PCB after shipments were effected, that Shri Gaonkar demanded Rs. 12/- per PCB and Gaonkar was paid Rs. 5 lakhs as his commission and that a high amount was paid to him and Gaonkar as Commission as they (Gaonkar and Raghavan) were aware of the over-inv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
