9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (1) TMI 707X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Rs. 2,500/- (Rupees Two Thousand Five Hundred only) on the Respondent as well as the transporter. Although there were two parties viz. the transporter i.e. Calcutta Golden Transport and the present Appellant before the learned first Appellate Authority below, the present Appeal by Revenue is against only Shri Bharat Parekh, who was the noticee No. 2 before the learned Adjudicating Authority. Revenue s grievance in this Appeal is that the order of the lower Appellate Authority was not legal and proper in view of lawful seizure of the goods from the custody Shri Ram Chandra Sahani, who was representative of the transporter namely M/s. Calcutta Golden Transport at 125, M.G. Road, Kolkata and failed to satisfy the Authorities, leading evidenc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... elow is fruitless. The show cause notice in para 7 at page 3 having disclosed the licit documents having been produced, those were not looked into by the Authority below. Further by letter dated 19-4-2003, 28-5-2003 and 31-7-2003, the Respondent was repeatedly informing the department that he was not served show cause notice. The show cause notice having been served on the Advocate for Respondent on 3-8-2005 as seen from the record the proceeding was barred by limitation for no service of notice within six months of seizure of the goods made on 19-8-2002. In view of the submissions made, he prayed that the order of the lower Appellate Authority be upheld. The learned Counsel also submitted a written note to the above fact and relied upon th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... WB/02 was registered on the reasonable belief that the goods were imported to India in contravention of the provisions of law making the goods liable to confiscation without being documented. Seizure list was also given to Shri Sahani and also statement was recorded from him. 4.4 One Shri Girish Pandey of M/s. Calcutta Golden Transport Company was summoned. But he did not appear. Rather by a letter dated 29-9-2002 he stated that Sl. Nos. 01-19 of the seizure list belonged to one Shri Bharat Parekh, the present Appellant with address at 5A, Chandni Approach Road, Kolkata. By a letter dated 26-9-2002 Shri Parekh claimed to be owner of the goods in respect of Sl. Nos. 01-19 of the seizure list and submitting a photocopy of bill of Entry Nos. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... did not receive show cause notice in time followed by two other letters dated 28-5-2003 and 31-7-2003. Also on 15-10-2003 requested that no ex parte order may be issued. This clearly shows that the present Appellant was also aware of the proceeding before the learned Adjudicating Authority against him. He avoided with the pretext that SCN was not served on him when he preferred his claim of ownership of goods under Sl. Nos. 1 to 19 on 26-9-2002 before Customs Authority and avoided summon to cause presence on 18-10-2002. Followed by a letter dated 24-11-2003 requesting to issue copy of show cause notice to him to defend the charges appears to be a tactice to plead innocence. 4.7 It may be stated that the order of adjudication was passed o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he avoided summon. Burden was on him to prove ownership of goods with cogent and credible evidence. When the notice dated 30-12-2002 was issued, for the reason best known to the Appellant, he did not come forward to take that notice for which Shri Ram Chandra Sahani took notice on his behalf as Appellant as apparent from the top of the office copy of the show cause notice. The Appellant knowing fully well that the seizure of goods under Sl. Nos. 01-19 of seizure list was done and a proceeding registered as Case No. 38/IMP/CI/P I/WB/02, dated 19-8-2002 was pending, he avoided to appear on 18-10-2002 in response to summons issued under section 108 of Customs Act, 1962. Also his perfect knowledge of asking for a copy of the show cause notic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in Section 110(2) of Customs Act, 1962 and he is entitled to be heard upon such proposal. This is subject to the restrictions with regard to the confidentiality of the investigation proceeding. 5.3 In view of our aforesaid observations it would be proper to remit back the matter to the learned Appellate Authority below to examine the entire evidence on record, statement of Shri Ram Chandra Sahani recorded in the proceeding, steps taken for service of notice on the Respondent as well as material facts as to avoidance of summon and notice as well as provisions of Section 110 read with Section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962 and come to a proper conclusion in view of peculiar circumstances of the case affording reasonable opportunity of hearin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
