1983 (9) TMI 288

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sonal household effects, out of which a National Panasonic Video Camera and National Panasonic VCR were not given the benefit, in adjudication, of the Transfer of Residence Rules, by the Assistant Collector, on the ground that the Appellant's father and not the Appellant himself was the owner thereof. 3. The Appellant's father would appear to have arrived subsequently on 25-4-1982. 4. On his arrival the Appellant and his father would appear to have applied for a revision of the adjudication order. 5. In the order in revision the Additional Collector of Customs held that- (a) a scrutiny of the invoices revealed that the goods in question were purchased for export to India and were taken delivery of, directly, ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ppellant who happens to be the son of the owner; (e) the endorsement on the invoices giving directions for delivery to Globe Shipping Services Ltd. was made only with a view to avoid payment of VAT (the invoices show VAT at zero per cent) and in actual fact, however, the goods were delivered on the very day of the purchase to the Appellant's father by the shipping agent, as would appear clear from a certificate given by the shipping agent. 7. Shri Ramanathan, the learned Representative of the Respondent pointed out that denial of T.R. concession to the Appellant when he arrived on 11-3-1982 was correct because as per the documents he was not the owner of the goods. He was, however, advised to keep these items with the custom....