9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 652X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t. - Appeal No. C/70605-70607 & 70635/2017-CU [ DB ] - Final Order Nos. 70450-70453/2018 - Dated:- 5-3-2018 - Mrs. Archana Wadhwa, Member ( Judicial ) And Mr. Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member ( Technical ) Shri Priyadarshi Manish ( Advocate ) for Appellant Shri Mohd Altaf ( Asstt. Commr. ) AR for Respondent ORDER Per: Anil G. Shakkarwar Above stated four appeals are taken together for decision since they are arising out of common Order-in-Original bearing No. 11/Pr. Commr./Noida-CUS/2017 dated 21.07.2017 passed by Principal Commissioner of Customs, Noida Customs Commissionerate. 2. Brief facts of the case are that M/s ANM Electronics Pvt. Ltd. Shop No. 1, Block A-4, CSC First Floor, Paschim Vihar, Near Cottage Enclave, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons of Section 111 (d) and (m) of Customs Act, 1962. Further it appeared to Revenue that the value declared was grossly undervalued. Further, investigations were carried out at the declared premises of the M/s ANM Electronics. The said goods were seized on 23.09.2016 under Section 110 of Customs Act, 1962. On inquiry it was gathered that M/s ANM Electronics was a company registered with register of companies and it s a legal entity was a company limited by shares with authorized capital of ₹ 1 lakh and paid a capital of ₹ 1 lakh. It appeared that the seized goods were counterfeit and piratical within the meaning of Section 2(33) of Customs Act, read with Rule 6 of Intellectual Property Rights (Imported Goods) Enforcement Rules, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed 22.03.2017 was adjudicated through impugned Order-in-Original No. 11/Pr. Commr./Noida-CUS/2017 dated 21.07.2017. As per the directions of Hon ble Allahabad High Court in Writ Tax no. 266 of 2017 M/s G. Source (HK) International participated in the adjudication proceedings claiming to be the owner of the seized goods. The Original Authority has recorded in his finding that container pertaining to said Bill of entry was received at CMA-CGM CFS, ICD Dadri for transshipment to Arshiya FTWZ, Khurja. The Custodian M/s CMA-CGM Logistics (P) Ltd. Dadri had complained that some unscrupulous elements attempted to gate out the said container by presenting fake gate passes purported to have been issued by Custodian/Customs, to the security official. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -determined value of ₹ 75,00,000/- (Rs. Seventy Five Lakhs only) are hereby absolutely confiscated under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962. I order that the remaining mis-declared goods not found corresponding to the declaration given in Bill of Entry regarding value and quantity imported M/s ANM Electronics Pvt. Ltd. at re-determined value of ₹ 6,71,28,450/- (Rs. Six Crores Seventy One Lakhs Twenty Eight Thousand Four Hundred Fifty only) are hereby confiscated under Section 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962. However, I give an option to the owner of the goods to pay in lieu of confiscation a redemption fine of ₹ 1,00,00,000/- (Rs. One Crores only) under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962 alongwith appropriate c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ove the container from the custodian without custom formalities by presenting fake documents. Further the attempt was that the goods should not be examined and should be removed to FTWZ, Khurja. He submitted that the entire case was an attempt to import into India counterfeit goods and mis-declared the same to avoid its examination and clear at value lower than the required value to evade customs duty. 6. Having considered the rival contention and on perusal or record the above stated brief facts of the case very clearly indicate that the impugned Order-in-Original is sustainable. We, therefore, dismiss all the appeals filed by Appellants and uphold the impugned Order-in-Original. ( Dictated in and pronounced in Court on. 05/03/2018 ) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
