9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (11) TMI 611X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... does not deserve leniency. Therefore redemption fine imposed in adjudication remains un-intouched. Conduct of appellants show that they were consciously involved in the export of non basmati rice following dubious method to defraud the revenue. Therefore imposition of penalty on the exporter does not call for interference for which entire penalty is confirmed - Decided against assessee. - Appeal No. C/234 and C/235/2009 - FINAL ORDER No.53836-53837/2014 - Dated:- 9-10-2014 - Mr. D.N. Panda and Mr. Manmohan Singh, JJ. For the Appellant : Shri G.L. Rawal, Sr. Advocate, Shri Rajesh Rawal, Advocate For the Respondent: Shri V.P. Batra, DR JUDGEMENT PER: MANMOHAN SINGH; Appeal No. C/234 and C/235/2009 Appellants M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the bags in front row were of basmati rice and rest of the bags non- Basmati rice. The grain of non basmati rice did not conform to the specification of Basmati Rice as provided in DGFT Notification no. 55 (RE-2008)/2004-2009 dated 5..11.2008 (as amended) which required that grain of rice shall be more than 7mm of length and ratio of length to breadth of the grain shall be more than 3.6, the consignments were seized under Section 110 of the Customs Act, 196. Representative samples were drawn from all 13 containers and sent for testing to Shriram Institute of Industrial Research, 19, University Road, Delhi (hereinafter referred as SIIR ) under cover of test memo No.23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35 all dated 24.04.2009 to ascertain whe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... did not conform to the requirement of average length and length/breadth ratio as specified in the party s specification. That proved false declaration of description of goods under section 50 of the Customs Act 1962. 7. Statement of Shri Gyan Chand, Partner M/s.Vaibhav Overseas was recorded under section 108 of the Customs Act dated 15.4.2009 wherein he admitted after seeing samples that rice in many bags were apparently of non-basmati category. In a subsequent statement, he stated that order was placed with supplier for basmati rice but he loaded wrong consignment in place of basmati rice. Investigation found that Shri Gyan Chand misled them by an afterthought for the reason that non basmati rice was found concealed deliberately behind ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... where modus operandi to camouflage the non-basmati rice kept in interior row with basmati rice in the first rows emerged. 10. Annexure A to show cause notice extracted below, show premeditated plan of appellants to smuggle non-basmati rice in the guise of basmati rice. Each container contained 198 bags of basmati rice and 2100 bags of non-basmati rice. Details of other container s contents also indicates a systematic way to mis-declaration of the contents. S. No. Name of the Exporter Shipping Bill NO Date Bayer Description/marking Container No. Type of packing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d row contained non-Basmati rice. First row was used to camouflage the inferior rows. Samples were tested which proved intention of appellants to deceive revenge. Misdeclaration came to record. Test Results indicated that consignments were non basmati rice export of which is prohibited by DGFT Notification No. 55/(RE-2008)/2004-2009 as amended. Test results showed exported goods were non-basmati rice. That demolishes the defense plea of mixing of consignments and non basmati rice were wrongly loaded in the containers. Test reports confirmed that representative samples did not conform to the requirement of average length length/breadth ratio as prescribed by the DGFT Notification and were contrary to the specifications of rice declared by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
