TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (2) TMI 388
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Cus., in exercise of the powers conferred under Section 25(1) of the Customs Act, the Central Government had exempted import of raw pearls, natural or cultured and precious or semi-precious stones (other than rough diamonds), unset and uncut falling under Chapter 71 of the First Schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 (CTA) when imported into India, from the whole of the duty of Customs leviable thereon under the said First Schedule and the additional duty, if any, leviable thereon under Section 3 of the said CTA, subject to the condition that imports are made under a Replenishment License issued, and in accordance with paragraph 4.4.1 of the Export and Import Policy, or Gem Replenishment License issued under, and in accordance with, paragraph 4.4.13 of the Export and Import Policy of 2002-2007. The appellant being a regular Importer and Trader, imported the consignment of pearls on 8-4-2014 and filed Bill of Entry declaring as unprocessed pearls valued at Rs. 31,08,070/- which were to be cleared under the Exemption Notification No. 60/2002. The said consignment was examined by the officers of Precious Cargo Customs Clearance Centre (PCCCC) on 8-4-2014 and 3-5-2014. On 3-5-2014, t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....es of invoice and Bank details were filed on 20-6-2014 for the period 2010-11 and 2011-12. On 24-6-2014, the appellant had also submitted further documents and Bill of Entry for the past import for the year 2009-10. 2.2 Prior to show cause notice was issued, the appellant requested for providing examination report relating to Bill of Entry of the appellant under the provisions of RTI. The applicant filed another application under RTI dated 6-8-2014 with the same request and another application under RTI on 26-9-2014. The appellant had written another letter dated 29-10-2014 requesting for a copy of the statement recorded and also prayed for release of the goods under seizure. In the meantime, Customs authorities also made inquiries from various customers of the appellant including carrying on of search in the premises of the customers along with seizure of documents and also pearls from the customers' premises. The partner of the appellant, Mr. Shailesh Jhaveri, received a letter from the Revenue in terms of the RTI application for payment of requisite fee for the information. Accordingly, the said amount was paid on 11-11-2014 and the documents were provided being examinatio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 26-11-2014. 2.5 The show cause notice was adjudicated by the impugned order. The learned Commissioner have relied on the request by the Investigation Cell of SIIB, that the investigation involve inspection and scrutiny of large number of documents at PCCCC as well as the Importer Cell and after scrutiny of the documents further statement may be required to be recorded. It was further observed that it was submitted by the appellant through their Advocate that they had been called upon to submit copies of document relating to all the imports made during the last 5 years. Further, the Investigation Cell has submitted that the documents are voluminous in nature and co-relating them with other aspect of investigation is a time consuming task. Further, the documents regarding agreement with foreign supplies/indenters needs to be called upon and verified. The verification report of overseas inquiry is also awaited, which is essential to verify the declaration made by the shipper at origin. It was also observed that the Investigation Cell has stated that the perusal of the past Bills of Entry, and verification of the invoices and local purchase details is likely to take time and wil....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a had challenged the extension of time, on two occasions ex parte, without any opportunity of hearing. The learned Single Judge Bench of Hon'ble High Court held that there was no need to give any time for the extension to issue the show cause notice, as the same is only to the satisfaction of the Collector. On appeal to the Division Bench of the Hon'ble High Court, it was held that under Section 110(2), the statutory obligation is cast on the Customs to return all the goods to the person from whom they were seized on completion of six months, where no show cause notice is issued. It was further observed that even assuming that the first extension which was granted ex parte and without any opportunity to the respondent of being heard, were to be valid, the period of 4 months granted having expired on 19-1-1964, and no order for further extension have admittedly been made, it was obligatory on Customs to return the watches to the respondent. It has been stated, under Section 110(2) that there was a corresponding statutory right with the respondent to have them restored to him. Once such right is accrued to the respondent, it could not be defeated by an order passed one month after th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the rival contentions, I find that the issue relates to the live consignment for which Bill of Entry was filed on 8-4-2014. Further, from the copy of the show cause notice and the impugned order, it is evident that the inquiry with respect to live consignment was completed sometimes in May-June, 2014 when the reports have been received from the Laboratory, which is evident from the copy of the Panchanama wherein the Laboratory reports have been shown to Panch-witness on 29-5-2014. I further find that the request for extension of time is vague as the main reason stated is that, some reference has been made through proper channel to conduct overseas inquiry and the reply is awaited. Further, the request has not been investigated on the ground that the appellant have already provided a copy of Bills of Entry for the past imports. As the investigation requires time to verify records of past imports in the office of the PCCCC, I hold that there is no specific reason for extension of time with respect to live consignment dated 8-4-2014. The live consignment cannot be kept under further detention for making the inquiry into past imports as the goods are neither restricted nor prohibited. ....