TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2007 (10) TMI 206
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing there. The officers directed the godown-keeper to produce the document or record of such foreign originated fabrics. As the godown-keeper could not produce any document/record of the foreign origin fabrics, the officers, in the presence of two independent panchas and godown-keeper, systematically inventorised the fabrics of foreign origin in the godown premises. Subsequently on 29-5-2003 the officers seized the goods and deposited the same in Customs godown at Todi Industrial Estate. The appellants herein claimed the ownership of the said goods and in support of their claim, they submitted copies of bills of entry No. 000235 dated 2-1-2003 and 000609 dated 9-1-2003, along with ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on the judgment of the Tribunal in the case of Mohammed Yaseen, Bangalore v. Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore, 2005 (189) E.L.T. 56 (T) = 2005 (102) ECC 305 (Tri.) for this proposition. He also relies upon the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan in the case of Rang Lal v. Union of India, 2002 (139) E.L.T. 550 (Raj.) for the proposition that the amount is to be refunded along with interest. He submits that the said judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan was upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as reported at Union of India v. Ranglal - 2002 (144) E.L.T. A97 (S.C.). 4. Ld. SDR, on behalf of the revenue, submits that the findings of the ld. adjudicating authority are very clear and it is seen that the goods which were se....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....etic polyester fabric was done by the authorities on 18-2-2003 from a godown at Bhiwandi. The current appellant i.e. M/s. Warren Trading Pvt. Ltd. had darned the ownership of such seized goods. Hence it was for the said M/s. Warren Trading Pvt. Ltd., to prove that the goods were not of smuggled nature. 6. The fabrics were seized by the authorities from the godown at Bhiwandi on 18-2-2003 by a panchanama. We may read portion of panchanama from the show cause notice which gives details about the seizure: "On 18-2-2003 the officers visited the godown No. 19 D' souza compound, Puma village, Bhiwandi and in presence of the panchas and Shri Upendra Sharma opened the seal of the godown and entered the premises. The officers then in the presence ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... none of the entries are matching. We are afraid to accept this proposition. The details of the seized goods as per panchanama clearly indicates that the country of origin is Korea or Taiwan. The details in the packing list attached with the bills of entry 000235 dated 2-1-2003 and 000609 dated 9-1-2003 clearly indicated that the goods were of Korea or Taiwan origin. It is also seen from the impugned order that the chart which was reproduced by the adjudicating authority (in para 28) clearly indicates that there are at least six entries which match with all the details in bills of entry. This would clearly go to show and indicate that the good which were seized from the godown were legitimately imported under the said bills of entry. It may....