2007 (11) TMI 45

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... in Oct.'02 but the original importer did not file Bills of Entry for a long time.  The present appellant held negotiation with M/s Tripasa Industries for purchase of the imported consignment but lying uncleared and filed application for transshipment permission in Feb.'03 to transfer the consignment to Nhava Sheva.  The transshipment permission was refused by the Assistnt Commissioner vide his order dt.4.6.2003 but the new importer was permitted to file Bill of Entry and clear the goods at Kandla Prt itself. (b) There were lot of correspondence and litigation in relation to these consignments, which were not relevant for deciding the present appeal. (c) They requested for re-shipment of the consignment to the original expor....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....aid buyer.  The foreign supplier then created certain documents including invoices (bearing same numbers and dates as those that were issued to AIG) favouring WTPL to manipulate the price so as to facilitate the clearance at a lower price of USD 0.48 per yard.  This brings forth the fact that there had been an attempt for mis-declaration of value which cannot be overlooked though it is a different issue that due to certain trade rivalries and disputes, the goods were never sought to be cleared by either of the parties.  The facts that TIL raised invoices bearing same numbers and dates on both TIL and WTPL showing different prices for the same goods clearly establish that there was a deliberate attempt to mis-declare the value....