9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 245X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... export of Red Sandalwood/Red Sanders and therefore, did not interfere with the order passed by the Adjudicating Authority. The learned Tribunal has also not found any grounds to interfere with the findings recorded by the Adjudicating Authority. The learned Tribunal concluded that the appellant was remiss as he had not made proper enquiry. The learned Tribunal had also observed that the appellant was aware of the prohibited goods and accordingly dismissed the appeals. It is clear from the impugned order that the learned Tribunal had found no reason to interfere with the findings recorded by the Adjudicating Authority. Appeal dismissed. - CUSAA 5/2021 - - - Dated:- 31-1-2023 - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU AND HON'BL ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was forwarded by another courier agency namely, M/s. Shuttle Express, New Delhi (which was also one of the noticees before the Adjudicating Authority). The other consignments were received from two individuals, who were Chinese nationals, Mr. Zhicheng Li and Mr. Zhang Jun. 4. According to the appellant, the said persons had walked into its office at Nehru Place, New Delhi and had booked the said shipments. Admittedly, the appellant had generated the computerized Airway Bills. However, the concerned authorities found that the two individuals, Mr. Zhicheng Li and Mr. Zhang Jun were not present in India on the date when the consignments were booked. 5. The order-in-original indicates that the Adjudicating Authority had examined the stat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Customs (Appeals), which was rejected by an order dated 13.05.2015. As stated above, the appellant s appeal against the said order was dismissed by the impugned order. 8. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the orders passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) and the learned Tribunal are unreasoned and non-speaking orders. He contends that the question of law that arises in the present case is that whether the said orders are unreasoned or not. 9. We do not find any merit in the aforesaid contention. The impugned decision turned on findings of facts as noted by the Adjudicating Authority. The order-in-appeal dated 13.05.2015 is a short order, however, it is not an unreasoned one. The Commissioner of Customs (A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
