9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 391X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gunny bags and bore markings as "Made in Bangladesh" and "Jack & Jones". The seizure of the goods was made at Patna Railway Station on the reasonable belief that the goods were smuggled goods. Further investigations were undertaken and follow-up action was taken in different places where the consignee of the goods were said to be located. Upon conclusion of investigation, show-cause notice dated 25.05.2015 was issued proposing to confiscate the seized goods. The issue was adjudicated by passing the Order-in-Original No.28- Cus/ADC/HQRS/2015 dated 27.11.2015, in which the Adjudicating Authority determined the value of the seized goods at about Rs. 13.71 lakhs, but ordered confiscation of the goods under the provisions of Section 111(b) & (d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the impugned order. He specifically relied on the findings of the ld.Commissioner (Appeals) in Paras 7 & 8, in which, he has given reason as to why the goods have been considered as smuggled goods and have been ordered for confiscation of the goods. 6. Heard both sides and perused the records. 7. As per the facts on record, the certain readymade garments totally packed in 15 gunny bags were seized from the Patna Railway Station. The examination of the goods revealed that they bore markings as "Made in Bangladesh" and "Jack & Jones". The lower appellate authority has observed that the brand name of "Jack & Jones" belongs is a top international brand name for readymade garments. On the basis of brand name sticker found on the garments as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e goods are smuggled into India. There is no evidence on record to show that the goods are smuggled into India. The Mobile phones are not restricted items for import and the same are freely traded in India. In the circumstances, I find no infirmity in the impugned order and both the appeals are dismissed." Similar views have been taken by the Tribunal in the case of Uma Trading Company (supra), wherein the Tribunal has observed as under: "6. We have carefully considered the submissions and perused the records. Undisputedly the goods involved in this case is rain coat, trousers and wrist watch chains. The goods are not notified under Section 123 of Customs Act, 1962. We find that once the goods are not notified, the onus lies on the depar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
