TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2006 (6) TMI 344
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the said truck Shri Bilal Ahmed informed the Officers that he had brought the goods from Mumbai on behalf of one M/s. Aasu Textile Pvt. Ltd. and same were covered by Consignment Note No. 2004 dt. 3-5-2000 of M/s. Surface Cargo Carriers Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as Transporter) Another such truck No. HR-38A-9897 carrying similar goods from Mumbai was also identified, in the vicinity, on 9-5-2000 and the driver of this truck Shri Brijmohan Singh informed that the goods on the truck were being carried for M/s. Aasu Textiles Pvt. Ltd. on Consignment Note No. 2002 dtd. 3-5-2000. The said truck was also off loaded. (ii) On completion of the search of the godown, rolls of foreign origin cloth such as PVC coated, PP non-woven fabrics and Taffeta Cloth (PVC coated cloth), Nylon Tricot Flocking fabric were found. Shri Kailash Chandar even on contacting on Telephone on 8-5-2000 and 9-5-2000 did not present himself at the godown. One Raj Kumar Kaushik claiming to be Director of M/s. Aasu Textiles Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Aasu Exim Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as party) contacted the officers on telephone on 9-5-2000 from Mumbai but did not attend the examination. Considering the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Act, 1962. The balance quantity of rolls, from which inter alia the 6 stickers indicating Nepal transit cargo deflection were recorded which numbered approximately 2768 were also seized. (e) (1) Shri Raj Kumar Kaushik admitted the goods to be of foreign origin as in godown nos. l and 2 and they belong to him and his brother Anil Kaushik who resided at Vapi and he and his brother were Directors of M/s. Aasu Textiles Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Aasu Exim Pvt. Ltd. the Companies which had imported the goods and 22 B/Es and Invoices were submitted towards this claim. (2) Kailash Chandar admitted to be related to the Kaushik and of receiving and selling goods imported by them and sending payments to them. (f) Tally of the contents of a godown with B/Es presented was done and it is recorded in the impugned order. (i) Shipping marks on B.E. Nos. 3761, 6743, 8575 and 118952 matched with corresponding rolls of cloth available Rolls of PVC coated cloth available matched with the BE Nos. 1854, 2722, 6271, 5439 and 5492. (ii) 880 rolls of PVC coated cloth with marking of Formosa Tafetta Co. which were available were physically found to be of uniform length, colou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nitted pile fabric (Lyera) matched with the description given in the B/E No. 5075 and 113 rolls of PP nor-woven fabric matched with the description given in the B.E. No. 5715 under which they were claimed to be imported. A distinct lot of 759 rolls of PVC coated cloth matched with the BE No. 5414 on the basis of colour. (ii) Rest of the stock in godown 2 did not tally with the BE No. 3676, 3670, 4850, 1997, 1345, 1698, 9355, 615275 and 8386, as per the quantity, shipping marks on the goods, colour and denier. Further, since the stock physically present in the godown was far less than the stock imported under above BEs the party was asked if they have maintained any records of the rolls colour-wise sold by them so that an attempt can be made to tally the number of rolls colour-wise with those claimed to be imported under the above mentioned BEs. It was informed by Raj Kumar Kaushik that no such record was maintained by them. (ii) The marks (ABCD R.No. A 1001 up, Made in China) on BE No. 615275 for 366 rolls of PVC leather cloth (in earlier proceedings taken approximately) as 388 rolls but in present proceedings 22 rolls were determined to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o other parties of Delhi that the cloth covered under the 23 B/s were sold by Kailash and delivery was made from the Godowns at Delhi and no bill was made for such sale nor there was any such bill book at Delhi that the record of their stock was maintained denier-wise in respect of fresh stock and packing list-wise in respect of stock lot and not BE-wise; that O/No. and R/ No. on the stickers found on PVC coated cloth rolls were not shipping marks. A statement of Shri Anil Sharma Partner in Surface Carrier/Surface Cargo Carriers (the transporter) who issued bilties in respect of the transportation of goods of the party was recorded on 3-8-2000. under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 in which he, inter alia, stated the procedure of issuing L.R.s; that only one LR book was used at any given time; that the LR book of Surface Carriers from March, 1999 began with Sr. No. 1 onwards; that. Surface Carriers was closed in June, 1999 and a new firm by the name Surface Cargo Carrier was opened in June, 1999 and its LR book began with the Sr. No. 1001 onwards; that since June, 1999 they sent 4-5 trucks with the party's goods every month to godown No. 2'; that in between 1-2 vehicles eve....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tigations that party was asked to explain the recovery of various types of stickers carrying shipping marks including NEPAL Cargo stickers and marks like ABCD, from their godowns in the face of the fact that their B.E.s did not carry shipping marks. The party maintained that the goods were stock-lot goods which were left-over of the main lot purchased by some buyer abroad and, thus, such stickers remained on the left-over goods and were sent to them as such. The party also stated that the NEPAL Cargo stickers may be just a trade practice because the goods imported by them under Bill of Entry No. 420 dated 3-7-98 marked as "CALCUTTA IN TRANSIT TO NEPAL" were cleared for home consumption and there is nothing illegal about it. During the tallying proceedings at Godown No.2 party claimed that goods were covered under 12 bill of entry and further claimed that the goods could be tallied, denier wise. Regarding 366 rolls and 880 rolls seized at Godown No. 1 on 7-7-2000, which were apparently not tallying with the B.E. No. 3676, 3670 and 7044 respectively, the party claimed that the stickers found on 366 rolls were because of goods being stock-lot and reiterated that 880 rolls were importe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lued at Rs. 58,92,000 used for concealing the smuggled goods valued at Rs. 44,43,450/- under the provision of Section 119 of the Customs Act, 1962 and also consequent penalty under Sections 112(a) and 112(b) of the Act. 1.4 The notices replied, the adjudicator heard and ordered. (i) Confiscation of foreign origin cloth collectively valued at Rs. 81,43,450/- under the provision of Section 111(b), (d), (k), (l)(m) and agreed a redemption of Rs. 25 lakhs. (ii) Seized foreign rolls of cloth collectively valued at Rs. 58,92,000/- used for concealing the smuggled goods were ordered to be confiscated under the provision of Section 119 of the Customs Act, 1962 & a redemption of Rs. 17,50,000/- was effected. (iii) Penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs each on Shri Raj Kumar Kaushik and Shri Krishan Chand under Section 112(a) and 112(b) were arrived. (iv) Penalty of Rs.10 lakhs each was imposed on M/s. Aasu Textiles Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Aasu Exim. Pvt. Ltd. under Section 112 (a) and (b) of the Act. Hence these appeals. 2.1  Heard both sides and considered, it is found : (a) The operation was conduct....