9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 337X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (i) that on 23.3.2013 the officers of SIIB, Air cargo export, New Delhi intercepted one Post parcel bearing No. EE119049462TH at postal sorting of Foreign Post office which was consigned by Mr. Khun Thah, Sook Samasdee Apartment, Sukhuvit, Soi 11, Bangkok, Thailand -10110 & consigned in the name and address of the appellant. The said parcel declared to contain Food and was without any declared value. The said intercepted parcel was examined by the Customs officers on 26.3.2013 and found to contain four verities of steroids / stimulants used for strengthening the muscle and providing strength thereto. The said parcel was seized by the Customs Officer on 26.3.2013 and representative samples of all the varieties were drawn. (ii) that on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e made from postal authorities who had intimated that no parcel / article had been delivered to the aforesaid addressee at this window and no request had been entertained in respect of above referred parcels. (v) that the samples were tested at the National Dope Testing Laboratory, Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium, New Delhi who confirmed that the contents were as per wrappers of the said goods. Report was also called from Drug Authorities who reported that as per Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, a person can not hold large volume of drugs for personal use without physician prescription. (vi) that the value of the seized goods were ascertained on the basis of similar goods through internet and the seized goods collectively were valued at Rs. 63,27,744/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e good at so high value in his name and address without his approval / consent. We do not find merit in the above reasoning of the adjudicating authority which is based upon the only fact that the appellants address stand mentioned on the parcel, The appellant in his very statement has denied his connection with the said goods. There is virtually no other evidence brought by the Revenue to show that it was the appellant who had ordered for the said goods. As rightly pointed out by the appellant, post parcels are delivered as window delivery and anybody could have got the clearance of the same. It is common fact that in such type of contrabaned goods, the importers do not give their own name and address and use the name and address of other ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
