9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (10) TMI 229X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, fax and accessories valued at Rs. 41,35,000/- cif by Shri Inder Kriplani. In both cases, the Airway Bills mentioned the goods as personal and household goods. On 28-4-99, the goods imported under both consignments were seized by the Customs under panchanama. On 18-6-99, in terms of Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962, the Customs obtained permission from the Magistrate for disposal of the goods pending adjudication. It appears that at a later date, the goods were sold. In both the adjudication orders, the Commissioner has observed this and has shown the sale proceeds of the goods imported by Smt. Kriplani as Rs. 5,81,076/-. The sale proceeds in the case of goods imported by Shri Kriplani was shown as Rs. 24,21,922/-. 3.Separate show c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Anil Balani advocate for the appellants and Shri A.K. Jain, D.R. for the Revenue. 5.In the case of goods imported as cargo, Section 46 requires a Bill of Entry to be filed for their clearance. This Section does not prescribe any period from the date of the import during which such declaration should be filed. Shri Jain attempted to show that Section 48 requires such documents to be filed within 30 days from the date of unloading of the import cargo. We find that the submission is wrong. Section 48 permits the custodian to sell the goods if no clearance is sought within 30 days. Such sale would be governed by the provisions of Section 150, where after meeting the cost of sale etc. and the duty burden, the reminder would be paid to the impo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as showed us the extracts of the said classification in so far as they relate to the goods imported by the importers in this case. On perusal, we find that all the goods imported were freely importable. 7.The Commissioner held that in the absence of their having obtained an import and export code number, the importers were ineligible for acquiring the clearance of the goods. Shri Jain referring to the provisions of Paragraph 4.9 of the Policy submitted that such code number should have been obtained before the goods were physically imported. He further submitted that in the absence of the Code number, the goods were liable to confiscation. Shri Balani countered this by saying that such number was freely given and there should not have bee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Policy, it cannot be ignored. 11.We would not enter into this controversy of an apparent lack between the two provisions of the Policy. We have earlier observed that if sufficient time was given, the appellants could have filed the documents for substantiating their claim for importability. What would have happened when the claim of importation either as cargo or baggage was made, is a matter of speculation in which we would not enter at this stage. 12.We, therefore, find that the situation in the present case is akin to what was before the Supreme Court in the case of Northern Plastics Ltd. v. CC C.E. [1999 (113) E.L.T. 3 (S.C)]. In that case, the goods were sold subsequent to confiscation. The order was upheld by the Tribunal. The S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
