2014 (11) TMI 611

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e, Noida. 2. In this case, Non Basmati rice weighing 304.912 MT valued at Rs. 1,76,53,602.37 (FOB) loaded in 13 containers, seized under panchnama dated 13.09.09 under section 113(d) of the Customs Act, 1962 were confiscated with a option to redeem the goods on payment of redemption fine of Rs. 32.50 lacs in lieu of confiscation. A penalty of Rs. 9,10,000/- was imposed upon M/s.Vaibhav Overseas under section 114 (i) of the Customs Act 1962. Further, a penalty of Rs. 2.60 lacs was also imposed upon Shri Gyan Chand, partner of M/s.Vaibhav Overseas, under section 114(i) of the Customs Act, 1962. 3. To appreciate the issue, brief facts are recapitulated. As per Notification No. 55 (RE-2008)/2004-09 dated 05.11.2008, as amended, issued by ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tainer wise is as under:- Sl. No. Shipping Bill No. & Date Container No. Test Sample No. & date 1   1053883 dt.02.04.09   UACU-3249186/20; UACU-3194416/20; UACU-3199104/20; 23 dt.24.4.09 24 dt.24.04.09 25 dt.24.04.09 2.   1053884 dt.02.04.09   BLJU 2052341/20 BLJU 2961860/20 MOAU -0512880/20 MOAU -0665200/20 26 dt.24.04.09 27 dt.24.04.09 28 dt.24.04.09 29 dt.24.04.09 3.   1053885 dt.02.04.09 MOAU -014953/20 MOAU -014953/20 30 dt.24.04.09 31 dt.24.04.09 4.   1053882 dt.02.04.09   MOGU-2569469/20 FCIU-3273293/20 MOAU -0221099/20 MOAU -0610531/20 32 dt.24.04.09 33 dt.24.04.09 34 ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eas. 9.1. On the other hand, ld.DR reiterated the findings as contained in the adjudication order. He also contended that it was clear case of suppression of facts and mis-declaration of description of goods. There was a deliberate as attempt to export non basmati rice in the guise of basmati rice contained in 13 containers. On examination of such containers in the presence of CHA representative, it was revealed that front row contained only basmati rice and second row behind first row contained non basmati rice. Actually non-basmati rice were camouflaged to avoid detection at the time of examination. 9.2 It was further agreed that attempt to export non-basmati rice in the guise of basmati rice came to light only upon detection, test ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Lbs(9.08kg) paked in Jute bag (Two packs further packed in PP bag 2102   19086 286292.40 UACU-3   194416/20   Basmati Rice           11. Heard both sides and gone through the records. 12. Record reveals that in the guise of Basmati rice, attempt was made to export non Basmati rice adopting questionable modus operandi. Actually 13 containers were attempted to be cleared. Containers were stuffed in such way that front row contained Basmati rice and second row contained non-Basmati rice. First row was used to camouflage the inferior rows. Samples were tested which proved intention of appellants to deceive revenge. Misdeclaration came to record. Test Results....