9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (8) TMI 346X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... upheld - C/244/2006 - A/1057/2010-WZB/AHD - Dated:- 3-8-2010 - Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Shri B.S.V. Murthy, JJ. REPRESENTED BY : Shri C. Subba Reddy, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri R.S. Sangia, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : B.S.V. Murthy, Member (T)]. The facts in brief are that the appellant had filed a Bill of Entry No. 128 dated30-4-04at ICD Vapi, declaring the imported goods under broad heading Furniture but including inter alia, goods such as washing machines, music systems, refrigerator and cooking range. The CHA M/s. Mathurdas Narandas had filed the Bill of Entry on behalf of the importer and the same was assessed. The assessed duty of Rs. 1,16,876/- was paid by the importer vide TR 6 challan N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. 2,14,756/- has been confirmed, redemption fine of Rs. 1 lakh has been imposed, and penalty of Rs. 1 lakh has been imposed on the appellant. 2. Heard both sides. Learned advocate for the appellant submitted that in this case, the Bill of Entry had been filed on30-4-04which was assessed after first check. It has also been submitted by him that value has been enhanced after assessment and the duty was paid by the appellant on7-5-04. However, Superintendent of Customs ICD Vapi wrote a letter dt.17-5-04to the CHA of the appellant to submit assessed Bill of Entry No. 128/30-4-04 and subsequently Bill of Entry was reconstructed when assessed bill of entry was not submitted and re examination was conducted. After adjudication and appellate pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CHA, the office copy of the Bill of Entry was available and it has been admitted that in the office copy of the Bill of Entry dt.30-4-04also, only 13 items as per the invoice had been incorporated and this clearly shows that the appellant had not filed the details as per packing list but had chosen to give the details only as per the invoice. Further, he also submitted that in case of Rajiv Woollen Mills Pvt. Ltd., the examination report had mentioned that 20% of the goods had been thoroughly checked and description was verified. Report also specifically stated that the goods were properly mutilated woolen rags and were not serviceable garments. In spite of the examination report, the Tribunal had taken a view that reassessment in that cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not explained how the value of 13 items in the invoice could be equal to more than 105 articles as per packing list. Further, they have also not explained why they did not seek and obtain licence for importing old and used items. The appellant had admitted that importation of old and used items was because of ignorance. The whole case of the department is based on documents only and therefore we do not find any merit in the contentions raised by the appellant. 5. Coming to the legal issue, the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Flock (India) Pvt. Ltd. cannot be applied to the present case in view of the fact that in that case, it was held that non-challenge of appealable order results in same attaining finality. In this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
