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

2013 (9) TMI 657

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... lower authority was not at all sustainable on facts since it had been decided on incorrect facts which cannot be sustained - it was noticed that no activity of manufacture was found to be carried out and the report of the jurisdictional authority that the said address was fictitious – lower authority had not at all applied his mind – revenue ignored the positive evidence put forth by the assesse – Decided against revenue. - C/No.120/12 - A-6/KOL/2013 - Dated:- 20-12-2012 - D M Misra, J. For the Appellant : Shri S Chakraborty, Asstt. Commr. (AR) For the Respondent : Shri Sudhir Kr Mehta, Adv. Per: D M Misra: This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the Order-in-Appeal No. Prev./Cus/01/2012 dated 27.01.2012. passed b .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... akh was imposed on the respondent under Section 112 (a) (b) of the Customs Act, 1962. 2.3 Aggrieved by the said Order, the Respondent filed an appeal before the ld. Commissioner Customs (Appeals). The ld. Commissioner (Appeals) after considering the evidences and submissions, allowed the appeal filed by the Respondent and directed to release of the said goods and refund of the amount deposited. Aggrieved by the said order, the Revenue is in appeal. 3. The ld. A.R. for the Revenue reiterating the grounds of Appeal has submitted that the address for manufacture of finished goods viz. silk fabrics in the DEEC book was declared, as 54, 4-IL-Cross, Hosahalli, Vijoy Nagar, Pipe Line, Bangalore. But, on investigation it was found that the sa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he factory address of 54, 4-IL-Cross, Hosahalli, Vijoy Nagar, Pipe Line, Bangalore, he has submitted that even though this address was shown in the DEEC Book as the place of manufacture, the same was no longer in operation and for manufacture of finished goods, it was Ramsundra Village, Kolar District, Kolar, Kranataka-563101 shown in the Advance License and categorically stated by Shri Tapan Chakrabarty, export manager and Shri Jiten partner of the Appellant in their statement; regarding the third address i.e. 12, 6th Cross, Laxmi Road, Shanti Nagar, Bangalore, he has submitted that though the said address was shown in their SSI Certificate issued by the Government of Karnataka, but it was their previous office at the time of issuance of t .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... and was investigated by the department. It is their submission that the finished goods were manufactured and exported by them as per of Advance License at their factory, at Ramsundra Village Kolar District, Karnataka. He has submitted mentioning the old factory address in the DEEC book could not be construed as violation of the conditions of relevant notification when their Advance License/DEEC permission cancelled initially on the said ground later restored by the Appellate of authority of DGFT. 5. Heard both sides and perused the records. I find that the only ground on which the adjudicating authority has directed confiscation of the 25 packages of silk yarn imported against BE No.1203 dated 25.5.2001 under Advance License No.021001191 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ing the course of investigation. Further, the lower authority even ignored the fact that the application for obtaining advance licences referred to their factory at Kolar. In addition to this, copy of the lease agreement of the Kolar Factory was also given to him, which too was ignored. The lower authority shunned all these evidence which favoured the appellant and went on to decide the case based on an incomplete enquiry report that the addresses at Bangalore were fictitious. When no enquiry has been made at Kolar, then the veracity of this report of the Department is itself doubtful. This is a clear case of non-application of mind and harassment to the appellant. More than 10 years have elapsed since the goods were seized and confiscated .....

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