TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (7) TMI 174
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., after waiving the condition of pre-deposit of the amounts involved, we take up the appeals themselves for disposal. 3. The relevant facts arise for consideration are, based on intelligence, a consignment of textile meant for export to Afghanistan, comprising of 3 Shipping Bills was detained on 27.10.2008 and examination was carried out. On examination, it was found that the goods were declared as dyed and/or printed fabrics made from 100% polyester filament yarn/texturised with embroidery and/or without metallised yarn. After examination, the officers of CIU, in the presence of exporter and /CHA recorded that the quantity was found to be correct in 2 shipping bills and in one shipping bill quantity was short and drew samples for....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f quantity, classification and value. However, the exporter is given an option to redeem the goods on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 7,50,000/- (Rupees seven lakhs fifty thousand only) under Section 125 of Customs Act 1962. (ii) A penalty of Rs. 3,75,000/- (Rupees Three lakhs seventy five thousand only) is imposed on M/s. Serene Fashions under Section 114(iii) of the Customs Act, 1962. (iii) A penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees one lakh only) is imposed on Shri Rajubhai Punjabi under Section 114(iii) of the Customs Act, 1962. (iv) The goods are allowed to be taken back to town on payment of above fine and penalty. 2. Ld.counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant would submit that the show-cause no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ere is a difference of only 13%. It is his submission that as per the clarification given by the Board vide Circular No.15/97-Cus dated 3.6.97, the lower authorities should have ascertained the present market value of the goods sought to be exported. It is his submission that the present value was not ascertained by the lower authorities and hence the value of the goods paid for procurement by the appellant and 65% claimed by the appellant as expenses should be considered as PMV and if it is so there is no much difference between the declared value and the fob value. It is his submission that the shortage of quantity of the goods sought to be exported in one of the shipping bills is only a clerical error and it was explained by the appellan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a and the check list declaration was made as to the description, quantity and value. He would submit that it is an admitted fact that in atleast one shipping bill, there was a misdeclaration of the quantity. As regards the submission made by the ld.counsel, on the point of check list being only an entry inward, it is his submission that Sec.50 talks about the declaration to be made by the assessee how the goods are brought in to the customs area. As regards the misdeclaration of the value, it is his submission that the value which has been declared was found to be incorrect even after adding the expenses sought to be claimed by the appellants as the purchaser of the goods. It is his submission that there is a definite misdeclaration as rega....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... misdeclaration and the liability to confiscation of the goods. It is seen that there is no denial of misdeclaration of the description in one of the shipping bills and there being short quantity in one of the shipping bill and the value is misdeclared in all the shipping bills. 8. The assessee s contention as regards shortage of the goods, we find that the assessee is not in a position to correctly satisfy us that there was no misclaration of the quantity. As regards the misdeclaration of the description the goods in one of the shipping bills, it is seen that the Textile Committee has opined that the goods were of viscose and not polyester yarn. Since there is misdeclaration of the description, quantity and the value in respect o....