2007 (2) TMI 510

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion 112(b) of the Customs Act. Further, the goods sent by the appellants have been confiscated under Section 111(m) of the Customs Act. The appellants strongly challenge the impugned order. 3. Shri K. Parameswaran, the learned Advocate who appeared for the appellants, urged the following points :- (i)      The appellants company inter alia is engaged in the business of trading of various types of computer parts, spares and accessories. They received orders from various buyers including from M/s. Suntech, Bangalore, for purchase of computer spares during 2002. Due to oversight, the appellants wrongly sent a shipment meant for another party to the said M/s. Suntech, Bangalore. The appellants sent a letter d....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....been initiated or any such addendum having been issued. (ii)    The fixing of personal hearing on 25-5-2004 had been sought to be communicated through the High Commission of India in Singapore. But, no such communication had been received by the appellant at any point of time. The appellant is not aware of any such action alleged to have been taken by the Customs Authorities in India. (iii)   Even from the departmental appeal filed in CESTAT on 14-5-2003, it is seen that there is no mention of the addendum having been issued. (iv)   The requirements of Section 124 of the Customs Act have not been fulfilled in toto. (v)     The impugned order is an ex parte order and passed i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... respect of the above Final Order. It is seen that the issue presently can be decided on a short point. The Show Cause Notice originally issued has not implicated the appellants. However, an addendum appears to have been issued later on the grounds that the appellant had abetted in certain actions which render the goods liable for confiscation under the Customs Act. It is seen that the appellants had not received the said addendum. Revenue is not in a position to prove proper service of the Show Cause Notice and also the addendum. In the case of CC v. Jayant Oil Mills (cited supra), it has been held that the giving of notice is not complete unless and until it reaches the person concerned or its actual tender. This decision has relied on th....