9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (4) TMI 104X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... department in connection with alleged Forged licence case for importation of consignment of rough diamonds. The appellant on coming to know about this aspect of the conduct on part of the importers in India, immediately instructed their Bankers and the local Indian Bank to return the documents with respect to the consignment to the Bank and close the file. They also addressed various messages to the carriers of the consignment not to deliver the parcel to the consignee. The local Indian Bank returned the documents to the appellants' Bankers and no transaction or payment has been made or effected for the said consignment. 1.2 From 6-3-2001 right up to 3-5-2004 appellants have addressed several letters to, amongst others, Deputy Commissione ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellants are under the reasonable belief that the show cause notice did not pertain to the diamond consignment sent on 27-2-2003. 2.1 On learning that an order has been passed sometime in May 2004 and their consignment, as sent by them has been ordered to be confiscated. They made efforts to obtain a copy of the said order and with great difficulty, from some other party, they obtained the same and learnt that the said consignment was seized by Customs authorities by a Panchnama dated 16-4-2001 and an order for absolute confiscation of the said diamonds has been passed. The appellants have therefore filed this appeal. 3. After hearing both sides, and considering the issues, it is found that : (a) the appellants have made all efforts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eld which result in ordering confiscation of the said diamonds claimed by the appellants herein without hearing them. Such an order of confiscation cannot be upheld, the diamonds claimed by this appellant i.e. a quantity of 21075.10 Cts valued at Rs. 75,45,148 seized vide Panchnama dated 15-4-2001 and ordered to be confiscated vide para 10 under the Customs Act, 1962 is required to be set aside and de novo adjudication ordered. 5. We have considered the plea of the ld. DR. He is claiming that the appellants have no locus standi as they are not persons aggrieved. We cannot agree, that the appellant herein is not a person aggrieved. The appellant has since the date of import making determined efforts to get the goods cleared by participatin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
