2014 (7) TMI 273

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he Appellant : Shri Jatin Mahajan, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri R K Mishra, AR JUDGEMENT Per Archana Wadhwa: Both the appeals are being disposed of by a common order as they arise out of same impugned order passed by Commissioner (Appeals) vide which he has rejected the appellants appeal and has allowed the Revenues appeal filed against the same order in original. 2. As per f....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nee. 3. During the course of follow up other investigation, the statement of various persons were recorded. Based upon the same, Revenue entertained a view that said television sets totally valued at Rs. 4,45,700/- were cleared without payment of duty. As such, show cause notice was issued for confiscation of the same, for demand of duty and for confiscation of truck as also for imposition of p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e time of provisional release, which was equal to the value of seized goods should be ordered for enforcement. They also submitted that duty should be demanded by taking MRP of television into consideration inasmuch as the same is specified item under section 4A. 5. On the other hand, the appellants contention was that they were merely transporters and not manufacturers. As such, duty cannot be....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....brand of television sets found loaded in the truck. No investigation stand conducted by the Revenue to find out as to who was the manufacturer of the said television sets even though the brand names were written on the same. Further, there is neither any investigation nor any evidence on record to show that said television sets stand cleared by the manufacturer without payment of duty. In the abse....