TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (9) TMI 1259
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Rachna Electronics (appellants herein) on 07.7.1995. Investigations were also conducted at Hong Kong with regard to the exports made by M/s. Batshita International Limited (supplier) of the appellants. Shri Chandrakant Zangda Proprietor of M/s. Martwin Electronics and M/s. Rachna Electronics, on 04.12.2005 in the statement recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962, deposed that in respect of the imports made by him, no purchase orders had been given in writing and the orders were given on telephone only and that he paid the amounts in 6 to 8 months from the import. He further stated that the imports were made by him through Air Cargo Complex, Ahmedabad and Custom House, Mumbai. 3. The subject matter involved in the present appeals revolve around the import of ICs, Diodes, Transistors, Transducers, Thyristrers, Triac, Diac, Capacitors etc. at Ahmedabad Air Cargo complex during the period from November 1993 to July 1994, covered by 16 Bills of Entry as detailed in the Annexure A to the show cause notice dated 06.11.1998. It is alleged in the show cause notice that the appellants had undervalued the impugned goods in as much as the value shown in the corresponding export de....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re many discrepancies between the export declarations and in the invoices etc. He also relied upon case laws of the Hon'ble Apex Court and the Tribunal. On the other hand, the learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue strongly rebutted the contentions of the learned Consultant and submits that export declarations were admissible under the provisions of Section 139(ii) of the Customs Act, 1962. He further submits that the export declarations were obtained through official channels from the Customs and Excise Department of Hong Kong under proper signature and seal of the concerned authorities. He also submits that these declarations are signed by the merchandiser and the exporters and they are legal documents binding on the exporters and appellants who imported the said goods under the said documents. He also refuted the contention of the learned Consultant that there are many discrepancies between the export declarations and the invoices. He submits that the export declarations contain numerous data and almost the entire particulars matches with the invoices, except in a few cases wherein there are small discrepancies which have been examined in detail by the adjudicating au....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tioned as 2,50,000 PRS i.e. Pairs, and therefore obviously 2,50,000 Pairs would make 5,00,000 pcs. The submissions made by the importer/notice in their reply therefore do not represent the truth as there is no discrepancy in the Invoice and Export declaration as has been made out by the noticee. Similarly, in another case with reference to Invoice no. BIL 3303441 dated 10.01.94, it has been pointed out that export declaration shows Rachana Electronics as consignee while Invoice shows Martwin Electronics. They have also submitted that export declaration is not signed by the authorized person However, on perusal of the relevant export declaration it is seen that this is signed. As regards change in the name of consignee, it is observed that postal address of both the firms is same i.e. 366, Ahmed Mansion, Lamington Road, Mumbai-400007 and that Shri C.K. Zangda was looking after the business of both the firms, and therefore it was not going to make any material difference whether goods were consigned in the name of M/s Rachana Electronics or M/s Martwin Electronics. Thus, the discrepancies pointer out by the importer appear insignificant and merely technical in nature and hence are no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... is tendered by the prosecution in evidence against him or against him and any other person who is tried jointly with him, the court shall (a) presume, unless the contrary is proved, that the signature and every other part of such document which purports to be in the handwriting of any particular person or which the court may reasonably assume to have been signed by, or to be in the handwriting of, any particular person, is in that person's handwriting, and in the case of a document executed or attested, that it was executed or attested by the person by whom it purports to have been so executed or attested; (b) admit the document in evidence, notwithstanding that it is not duly stamped, if such document is otherwise admissible in evidence; (c) in a case falling under clause (i) also presume, unless the contrary is proved, the truth of the contents of such document]. It is observed that the Export Declarations are obtained from the Customs and Excise Department, Hong Kong under the cover of their letter on letter head and signature, through Commission for India (High Commission/Embassy) in Hong Kong. It is also stated by Hong Kong Customs that they have no objection f....