9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 1458X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e from Chennai is not in doubt. Being the recipient of goods, the ownership of the said goods rest with the respondent. It is findings of the ld. Commissioner (Appeals) that the goods are not notified under Section 123 and therefore, it was incumbent upon the Revenue officials to prove beyond doubt that the goods procured were smuggled one. It is thus not necessary for the appellant to produce cop ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... umber of parcel packages which had arrived from Chennai. The said parcel packages were opened in presence of postal authorities and were found to contain camera and camera parts of foreign origin. As nobody came forward to claim the said goods, even though name and address of the respondents was mentioned on the packages, the same were detained and later on seized as no bills could be produced by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng for the Revenue reiterated the grounds mentioned in Revenue s appeal. He submitted that the appellant i.e. Shri Dilshad Gani did not produce any documents in support of his claim. He, further, submitted that since the goods appeared to be of foreign origin, the names can be manipulated and therefore, in absence of genuine documents showing licit acquisition and import of goods in question, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e ld. Commissioner (Appeals) that the goods are not notified under Section 123 and therefore, it was incumbent upon the Revenue officials to prove beyond doubt that the goods procured were smuggled one. It is thus not necessary for the appellant to produce copies of bills of entry under which goods were imported in India. Commissioner (Appeals) observed it is the submission of the applicant that h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
