9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 362X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t noticed. At the same time, an important aspect is that the appellant themselves came forward, after the goods had been cleared out of charge, to inform the customs authorities that they had in fact received excess quantity of goods. This attests to their bonafides. Jjustice should be accorded to the appellant by setting aside the order of confiscation as also setting aside the modified penalt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ave received 2800 number of phones in excess; that they have checked up with their supplier who has confirmed that they had sent 12000 phones by mistake. Appellant also sought correction of documents under Section 149 of the Customs Act, 1962. Proceedings were initiated. In adjudication proceedings, the assessable value was enhanced to the extent of excess quantity of mobile phones; the excess qua ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e, this mistake was on account of wrong invoicing by the supplier. She draws attention to airway bill which refers to 30 billets of 400 pieces each, which resulted to a total 12,000 mobile phones, which have been correctly received. In the circumstances, she states that that notification allowed benefit of correction of documents under Section 149 of the Act. In any case, there was no case for co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the correct quantity, they should have been allowed benefit of amendment under Section 149 ibid. This was not allowed and instead appellants were subjected to adjudication process and heavy penalties were imposed on them. At this stage, I am of the opinion that justice should be accorded to the appellant by setting aside the order of confiscation as also setting aside the modified penalty amount o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
