9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (7) TMI 693X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng, Vice-President]. - The appellant filed this appeal against the impugned order whereby bars viz. pen cells and button cells were confiscated on the ground that the same were smuggled into India and allowed to be released on payment of redemption fine and penalties were imposed. 2. The brief facts of the case are that on 10-12-2002 the business premises of the appellant was searched ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e notification all packaged products, are subject to compliance of Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977, when imported into India. As some of the packages are not having stickers of having MRP i.e. Maximum Retail Price, therefore, such packages has not crossed the barrier of customs hence liable for confiscation. 3. The contention of the appellant is that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arry name and address of importer, net quantity of goods, manufacture and year of packing and maximum retail price, as the goods in question are not having stickers of MRP, therefore, rightly confiscated. 5. In this case, the case of the Revenue is that the goods were smuggled into India. The appellant produced evidence in support of purchase of the goods and also produced Bill of Entry unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The only ground to arrive at such conclusion was that MRP stickers were not on the packages. Merely absence of MRP stickers on the packages without any other cogent evidence cannot be lead to a conclusion that goods are smuggled in nature. In these circumstances, the impugned order is not sustainable hence set aside. The appeal is allowed.
(Operative part of the order pronounced in open Court) X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
