9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (2) TMI 688X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Heard both sides. This matter was remanded earlier by the Tribunal and the lower appellate authority has passed the impugned order-in-appeal against which the appellant has filed the present appeal. Shri Tanvir Hussain, ld. Advocate appearing for the appellant states that in the de novo proceeding, the documentary evidence submitted under letter dated 12-2-2000 clarifying that the goods were trans ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rnational Corporation have been returned undelivered with/without postal remarks, show the fictitious nature of both the companies. It shows that some unscrupulous persons/companies are running their business as importer/exporter in a clandestine manner and trying to legalize the illegal importation into the country. Regarding contention No. (2), it is to be mentioned that the B/E No. 1889 dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y a segment of the total seized goods. So, from the discussion above, it is evident that both the contentions of the appellant are contradictory to his earlier versions and not supported by any corroborative evidence. The documents submitted by the appellant does not cover the whole lot and nothing but after thought and used as a cover up to suppress the smuggled nature of the seized goods. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... igin of the goods has been written as U.A.E. on the Bill of Entry, is not supported by any final amendment in the Bill of Entry apart from the fact that he himself had in his statement dated 23-8-99, submitted that he has not purchased any foreign origin goods. In view of the above, I hold that the appeal is of no merit and hence the same is rejected. The penalty of Rs. 4,000/- imposed on the appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
