9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 521X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at he was seeking to export. In the garb of exporting basmati rice, the assessee was trying to take out non-basmati rice which was clearly prohibited. There is a clear finding of fact recorded by the tribunal that not only was the assessee attempting to play fraud but also upon re-examination of the sample reports, it was found that the assessee had actually tried to export consignments of non-bas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , JJ. For the Appellant : Anil Kumar Bajpai For the Respondent : Bijendra Kumar Singh ORDER Heard learned counsel for the appellant and Sri Krishna Agarwal, learned counsel for the Department. This is an assessee's appeal under section 130 of Customs Act, 1962 filed against the order of the Customs Central Excise Appellate Tribunal dated 18.9.2014. Following question ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gent when there is not even an allegation in the show cause notice that the appellant had connived with the exporter in mis-declaring the subject goods as basmati rice which were later found by the department as non-basmati rice? (IV) Whether the impugned order passed by the learned Tribunal is not perverse, being totally contrary to the provisions of Customs Act, 1962 as well as facts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d 430 bags of non-basmati rice and, therefore, the plea as made by learned counsel for the assessee that it was a case of mishandling of goods during loading, cannot be taken to be true. It was a deliberate strategy to keep the basmati rice in the front of container in order to avoid the detection of the non-basmati rice which was sought to be taken out surreptitiously. The imposition of penalt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
