9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 1178X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s directed by the Hon ble High Court, goods were released to importer. The Adjudication Authority has concluded the findings against the appellant on the ground that documents pertaining to the import was handed over to clearing agent by the appellant. However, there is no admissible evidence forthcoming in the impugned order that appellants had resorted to undervaluation of goods. Moreover as per the order issued by Adjudicating Authority, goods were released to the Proprietor of the importer M/s Pushpa Telecom. Once the importer itself appears before the Hon ble High Court by filing an affidavit and when the Hon ble High Court find the proprietor of the firm M/s Pushpa Telecom Shri R. Mohandas Rangasamy as bona fide importer to order rele ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lecom to import goods illegally. 3. Learned counsel for the appellants further submits that the proceedings were initiated based on the statement of Shri Xavier and even in said statement also, he never deposed that appellant used the license of M/s Pushpa Telecom. Further there is no allegation that appellants have prepared any invoice or evidence to substantiate the finding regarding involvement of appellants when importer resorted to undervaluation. In present case, based on the allegation made by respondent, the importer paid customs duty, redemption fine and penalty and goods were also released to the importer. There is no prohibited goods imported by the importer to invoke provisions of Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962. In t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... attracted. Penalty cannot be imposed only on the basis of heresay evidence, or the incriminating statement of one of the co-accused in absence of other corroborative evidence, as has been held by Hon‟ble Supreme Court in the case of Vinod Solanki versus Union of India {2009 (233) E.L.T. 157 (S.C.). 4. Learned D.R. reiterated the findings given by the Adjudication Authority and also submits that there are sufficient evidence to presume that appellants used the license of M/s Pushpa Telecom to import goods illegally. 5. I have gone through the findings given by the Adjudication/Appellate Authority and grounds of appeal. The investigation was conducted alleging illegality by way of undervaluation of the goods. During investigatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
