9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 408X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ith the prohibitions imposed by the DGFT notification No. 14/2009-14 dt 14/10/2009 can be only be questioned from the importer. No investigation was done from the seller of the mobile phones in Delhi to establish that mobile phones were of smuggled nature. Once appellant has produced the purchase bills with respect to the seized goods then it cannot be said that the seized goods were of smuggled nature when no investigation was done at sellers end. In the absence of any other claimant of goods the present appellant has to be considered as the rightful owner. Appellant cannot be questioned with respect to the restrictions imposed by DGFT when the same were also not the subject matter of the show cause notice. - Decided in favour of assessee. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (ii) Nand Kishore Dabra-2005 (191) ELT 624 (Tri-Del) (iii) Lalchand Wadhwani- 2006 (200) ELT 281 (Tri-Del,) (iv) Pawan Kumar Sharma-2006 (197) ELT 263 (Tri-Del) (v) Tokyo Electronics-2007 (212) ELT 86 (Tri-Del) (vi) Sundarlal-2004 (165) ELT 250 (Tri-Kol.) 3 Sh. N.K. Naskar AC (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue argued that import of mobile phones, is prohibited as per Notf. No. 14/2009-2014 dt 14/10/2009 issued by DGFT, Ministry of Commerce Industry, New Delhi. Learned AR thus strongly defended the order passed by the first appellate authority on the grounds that he has elaborately discussed the prohibitions. That appellant did not come forward to claim the goods for more than one week and is not the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ant has to be considered as the rightful owner. Appellant cannot be questioned with respect to the restrictions imposed by DGFT when the same were also not the subject matter of the show cause notice. 4.1 In the case of Siddartha Agarwal Vs CC Patna (Supra) this bench held as follows in Para- 1.2 1.2 We find that the Appellants have produced necessary documents to show that they have purchased the impugned mobile phones from a dealer and the dealer has also confirmed the fact of sale and has produced the necessary documents such as bill of entry, invoice, packing list etc. it has been observed by the original Authority that the import documents do not contain the X.E.I number of the impugned mobile phones. If the Customs Authorities ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
