1999 (8) TMI 373

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t. Shri KM Patwari, JDR, for the Respondent.  [Order per : Gowri Shankar, Member (T)]. - The common question to be considered in these appeals is the liability to penalty under Section 112 of the Act on Biren Shah, the sole proprietor of M/s. Neptune Décor, the appellant before us. In the order impugned in the appeal, the Collector (Appeals) has confirmed the finding of the Ad....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ited in the order of the Additional Collector is the statement of Biren Shah, and of Kumar Sachdev who is alleged to have received the difference between the actual price of the goods and the lower value in their clearance declared by Biren Shah. He further contends that the benefit of Notification 224/85 available to the appellant and even if it was incorrectly claiming the benefit of the notific....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... value only arises with regard to the liability to penalty. No doubt, the only evidence of under valuation is of the statement of Biren Shah and the letter of Neptune Ltd. As against this, there is an indication from the statement of Kishore Bhagat, the Custom House Agent who was handling the consignment that he expected that the bill of entry would be passed at the value declared because "earlier....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....able to the appellant. 16. On balance therefore it has to be held that the value of the goods were misdeclared and therefore their confiscation under clause (m) of Section 111 of the Act is sustainable. At the same time, the fact that similar consignments were being cleared at the lower price declared by the appellant would be a mitigating factor; Taking into account these aspects, as also the ....