9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 204X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hs on the first and Rs. 3 lakhs on the other two under section 112 of Customs Act, 1962. 2. Allegedly they were involved in mis-declaration that led to evasion of duties of customs on the imports effected by M/s Daewoo Ship Building and Heavy Machinery Ltd. The consignments intended to fabricate 'SHG platforms' for offshore drilling on contracts of M/s ONGC Limited, were, instead of being imported against bills of entry, transferred from the air cargo complex against trans-shipment permits by claiming these to be ship stores intended for their vessel AYANG-II. The adjudicating authority has held that the value was mis-declared and that the contents were described as 'ship stores' to suppress the link to the offshore p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... abetted in doing or omission ofsuch acts; and are also the firms and persons who were concerned in carrying, removing, depositing, keeping, concealing and/or dealing with the impugned goods knowing fully well and/or were having reasons to believe that the said goods are liable to confiscation and thus they have rendered the impugned goods liable to confiscation under Section 111 (d) & (m) of the Customs Act, 1962 and thus they have rendered themselves liable to penal action under Section 112(a) and (b) of the Customs Act, 1962. 28. In the present case goods imported are liable to confiscation as held by the following decisions. i) Cestal South Zonal Bench, Chennai in Venus Enterprises Vs. CC, Chennai has held that misdeclaration an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 11, 12 & 13 i.e. M/s. Daewoo, S/Shri H. 1. Bomb, M. H Lee, C.S. Yoon, M/s. Trans International Shipping, S/Shri Joe Cabral, F.J. Lewis, Tony X. Michael, M/s. Durga Enterprises, Shri S.U. Shin, Shri J. W. Kim never appeared for hearing nor replied to the p.h. intimation. Shri Ajay Uday Singh, noticee no. 9, in response to this office intimation regarding p. h. fixed on 29.12.2008, he sought 10 to 15 days time. Again in his letter dated 05.01.2009 he requested to supply photo copies of the related documents. In his letter dated 23.01.2009 Shri Ajay Udya Singh again requested time for hearing. However, he never appeared for p. h. fixed for 10.02.2009, 25.09.2009 and 09.03.2009 respectively. Shri Sunil Kumar, Advocate of M/s. R. R. Joshi (S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
