9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 345X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f Department should have objected at time of import – Since no objection was raised at time of import, assessments cannot be reopened for valuation under guise of mis-declaration of country of origin – No cogent material was collected to substantiate allegations – It is matter of year 1997 and it seems that exercise of remitting matter back may be futile – Therefore, appeal dismissed as no question of law involved – Decided against Revenue. - Civil Appeal No(s). 1874/2006 - - - Dated:- 21-8-2015 - Mr. A.k. Sikri and Mr. Rohinton Fali Nariman, JJ. For the Petitioner : Ms. Pinky Anand, ASG, Mr. Yashank Adhyaru, Sr.Adv., Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, Adv., Ms. Binu Tamta, Adv., Mr. Rajiv Nanda, Adv. For the Respondent : Mr. Alok Yadav, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e findings that there is no corroborative evidence and the role of Mr. K.M. Puri is questionable. There was apparent conflict in the status of Mr. Puri wherein at one stage he projects himself to be the partner in M/s. Pearl Industrial Company, whereas thereafter he states that he is merely an interpreter. The Panchnama dated 09.11.1997 raises a presumption against Mr. Puri and since search was completed merely in 90 minutes, he being an impartial and biased witness, his statement cannot be relied upon, more so when no opportunity to cross-examine was granted to the assessee despite requests. The trade declarations as supplied by Mr. Puri were not authenticated copies. No invoices showing a higher amount were ever produced by Mr. Puri even ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the price for entire South Asia region as US$85 per 1000Ft/305 meters as against the price of US$ 31.08 declared by importers. The Tribunal has set aside the redemption fine by giving the findings that declaration of the country of origin were to he made by the supplier/exporter. If goods bore Australia marking, the Appraising Officers of the Department should have objected at the time of import. Since no such objection was raised at the time of import, assessments cannot be reopened for valuation under the guise of mis-declaration of country of origin. It appears that the allegations were very serious but no cogent material was collected to substantiate these allegations and that is the result of shoddy and slip shod investigation. In n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
