TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2004 (6) TMI 571
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pression of facts for evasion of customs duty. Accordingly, investigations were taken up by them. Upon examination of the items it was observed that labels of M/s. Ritchie Brothers, Auctioneers alongwith lot Nos. were stuck on them. When the customs authorities searched the office of the importer at Ahmedabad they recovered inter alia the following items :- "A. Various types of pamphlets, some of them pertaining to M/s. Ritchie Bros. for the publicity purpose with regard to the machinery auctioned at different locations, preliminary notice. B. Visiting Cards of M/s. Ritchie Brothers, Auctioneers. C. Air Ticket No. 6296639469 for the sector Ahmedabad -Sharjah-Ahmedabad in the name of Barad H Mr. Confirming his visit to UAE during the auction period of M/s. Ritchie Bros. i.e. 25-10-1999 to 27-10-1999. D. Listing catalogue No. 246 of M/s. Ritchie Brothers Auctioneers having pen circled of the value of the some of the Serial Nos. mentioned in the book. E. Listing catalogue No. 361 of M/s. Ritchie Brothers Auctioneers having penciled circled some of the Serial Nos. mentioned in the catalogue and remarked as "Purchased" and also showing value of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....also recoverable under Section 28(AB) of the Customs Act, 1962. (d) The B/G furnished in the sum of Rs. 1.60 crores may be enforced and adjusted against the duty amount confirmed. (e) I order confiscation of the goods i.e. 31 pcs. of machinery valued at Rs. 3,42,37,810/- under Section 111(d) and 111(m) of the Customs Act, 1962. As the goods are not physically available for confiscation. I order to redeem the said goods released under B/G against a redemption fine of Rs. 38,00,000/- (Rupees thirty eight lacs only) under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962. This may be adjusted from the B/G furnished by the party. (f) I also impose a penalty of Rs. 1,21,80,273/- (Rupees one crore twenty lacs eighty thousand two hundred seventy three only) on M/s. Ketan Construction Company Ltd., Ahmedabad under Section 114(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. (g) I also impose a penalty of Rs. 20,00,000/- (Rupees twenty lacs only) on Shri Harisinh Amarsinh Barad under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. So far as other Directors named in the notice is concerned their role has not been speci....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at in the absence of any evidence linking the sale of the goods in question to M/s. Dhanak Jewellers and appellant's subsequent purchase of them, the adoption of the sale prices to M/s. Dhanak Jewellers for the assessment of appellant's imports would be to fix assessable value for the appellant's import based on the impermissible presumption that subsequent sale by M/s. Dhanak Jewellers and sale to appellants would be at the same prices as paid by M/s. Dhanak Jewellers. It has also been pointed out that the computation of value and (consequently) duty amount are not correct since freight and insurance have been taken as a percentage (%) of value after rejecting actual amounts paid. 6. The learned DR has contended that the import documents produced by the appellant are entirely false and unreliable and those documents have been procured only to get the goods assessed at the lower declared values and to evade custom duty. He has submitted that this position is clearly established by the documents forming the records of the case as well as the statement of Shri Harisinh Amarsinh Barad. The learned DR has pointed out that while the auction sale of the goods took place between 2....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... has pointed out that the main evidence in the present case are the auction documents seized from the appellants' premises and the statement of Shri Harisinh Amarsinh Barad. The invoice obtained by Embassy in Dubai and the fact of Shri Harisinh Amarsinh Barad's presence during the auction, corrobate the values indicated in the seized documents. The learned DR, therefore, submitted that the case law relied upon by the appellant has no application to the facts of the present case. He has also submitted that once the import documents produced were found to be false, the authorities were fully justified in going by the prices indicated in other documents and in assessing the goods to duty after making additions towards freight and insurance etc. at flat rates. 7. We have perused the records and have considered the submissions made by both sides. The documents produced by the appellants completely lack credibility. To begin with, the proforma invoice issued by M/s. Gulf Star is dated 24-10-1999. On this date, goods had not even been put to auction and sold and therefore this proforma invoice can only be treated as a false document issued to enable the Indian importer to obtain i....