9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (3) TMI 39X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i Leela Ram. He also produced the invoices showing purchase of calculators from the said two firms. 2. In follow-up action, statements of Shri Narayan Das and Shri Leela Ram were recorded wherein they admitted having sold the calculators under the cover of invoice to the appellant. In as much as the invoices did riot mention brand name, make, model number and country of origin, the same were believed not to cover the seized calculators. During the course of further investigations, statement of appellant was recorded on 11-8-2003, wherein he produced two affidavits of his father and his uncle to the effect that the goods were purchased by them from Jaipur party, who had legally imported the same under bill of entry and on payment of duty. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er of purchase invoices. It is further seen that Shri Narayan Das and Shri Leela Ram have produced the invoices of their purchase from a Jaipur party along with the bill of entry showing legal import of goods in question. The said document do not stands accepted by the authorities below on the ground that the invoices do not show brand, model number and country of origin of the calculators. 6. It is recorded in Para 14.3 of impugned Order-in-Original that affidavit of Jaipur party showing importation of goods stands filed along with B/E, but in the invoice of sale, he has not shown the country of origin or the number of bill of entry. He has further recorded in Para 15 of his order that: "15. I have carefully gone through the case records ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fter careful examination of the documents submitted by the notice along with the reply to that the calculators sold under these in voices are of foreign origin. Thus these documents which indicate sale of calculators between traders of Jaipur and Ahmedabad do not appear relevant to this case. The copy of affidavit submitted at the time of personal hearing is only in respect of 400 pcs. of calculators and is not supported by any Bill of Entry. It is noticed that the Bill of Entry in which the said 400 calculators were claimed to have been imported is dated 11-1-2001 whereas the calculators were detailed on 1-4-2003, i.e. after a gap of over 2 years and 2 months. It is not likely that electronic goods which quickly loose value with passage of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
