Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2011 (1) TMI 543

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ce which was issued covering the goods for transportation during the course of international trade was required - Held that we cannot find fault with Revenue for initiating the proceedings in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and conclusion has been reached on the basis of strict interpretation of law as regards declaration to be made on the bill of entry and on that basis appellant is entitled to benefit of doubt - Appeal is allowed - E/1854/2009 - A/52/2011-WZB/AHD - Dated:- 24-1-2011 - Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Shri B.S.V. Murthy, JJ. REPRESENTED BY : Shri Rajiv Gupta, Consultant, for the Appellant. Shri Avinash Thete, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order per : B.S.V. Murthy, Member (T)]. The appellant is engaged .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... as been indicated as Sodium Saccharine BP 98 and mesh size has nor been indicated. The mesh size of the Sodium Saccharine was apparently indicated in the invoice No. 40 issued by the Bombay unit of the appellants. The Sodium Saccharine was initially purchased by the Bombay unit on high sea sale basis and placed in public bonded warehouse. The goods in this case have come from the Customs public bonded warehouse at Bombay to the appellants. The Commissioner in the Impugned order has come to the conclusion that there was mis-declaration in view of the following facts : (i) The bill of entry filed by the unit in Surat did not give mesh size deliberately. (ii) The bill of entry has to be read with the invoice and the invoice ha .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... On the other hand, appellants have submitted that bill of entry had been filed in advance before the consignment was received and goods moved under transit bond. The invoice issued by the DTA supplier which is basically another arm of the same appellant, was made at the instance of Surat SEZ and cannot be a basis for the purpose of bill of entry and for the purpose of transit bond. Further, the unit was a single legal entity and there cannot be buying and selling between them. It was also contended that the seizure was illegal since permission of the Development Commissioner was not taken. Further, the benefit of income tax was available to them irrespective of the fact of profit or trading or manufacture. 5. We find that in the bill of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... on are decided at the time of bonding. Therefore, what is required is only the original invoice issued by the foreign supplier and local invoice is not required for the purpose of assessment of bill of entry. Therefore, the department should have insisted on the invoice covering the consignment issued by the foreign supplier. Further, it is to be noted that the commercial invoice issued for 5 MT dated 18-7-2008 also does not give mesh size. Further, it is also noted that the proforma invoice No. 853 dated 16-5-2008 is quoted in the invoice whereas proforma invoice Mo. 853 dated 14-4-2008 had mentioned mesh size. The date of proforma invoice in the commercial invoice issued by the foreign supplier is also not tallying. In fact, there are sev .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he bill of entry. When the invoice was issued by the DTA arm, which cannot be a basis for assessment of bill of entry, it cannot be relied upon for the purpose of mesh size alone. For the purpose of discrepancies between bill of entry and the invoice, invoice which was issued covering the goods for transportation during the course of international trade was required, Therefore, conclusion drawn by the learned Commissioner that there was mis-declaration in the mesh size declared in the invoice and the actual mesh size, is not supported by the legal provisions. Because of the confusion and lack of clarity of various issues, the only course left is only examining the statutory requirement and documents submitted with bill of entry. When we do .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates