TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (10) TMI 718
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f convenience, we are referring to the facts of the case in Custom Appeal No.1 of 2016. This appeal arises out of orders passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, West Zonal Bench, Mumbai (for short "Appellate Tribunal"). The challenge in this appeal is to the three orders passed by the Appellate Tribunal. The first is stay order dated 6th June 2014, the second is the modification order dated 13th January 2015 and the third is the consequential order passed by the Tribunal on 16th April 2015 of dismissal of the appeal preferred by the appellants. 2 Appeal No.1 of 2016 has been preferred by Shri Rakesh Rathi in his capacity as a partner of M/s. S.G.Sales Corporation. M/s.S.G.Sales Corporation and M/s.Laminates Dist....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ere recorded of the said Rakesh Rathi and others. 6 Demands issued to the said firms were confirmed in adjudication proceedings by the Commissioner and penalties were imposed. 7 By the first impugned order dated 6th June 2014, the Appellate Tribunal held that the Appellants have not been able to make out a prima facie case of waiver of duty. However, keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, M/s.S.G.Sales Corporation and the M/s.Laminates Distributors (India) were directed to deposit 50% of the duty demanded against the liability of the full duty within a period of eight weeks. It was directed that on predeposit of the said amount, the predeposit of the remaining amount of duty and penalty will stand waived. As far as p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....evision (P) Ltd. 2007 (214) E.L.T. (S.C.). He submitted that this is a case where there is no evidence adduced by the department showing prices of the contemporaneous import. In any event, it was necessary to follow the mandatory regime of the said Rules of 1988. He, therefore, submitted that this was an appeal where a strong prima facie case was made out before the Appellate Tribunal and therefore, the order of predeposit passed by the Tribunal is completely illegal. 10 The learned senior counsel submitted that by setting aside the order of dismissal of the appeal, an opportunity may be granted to the petitioner to make appropriate application to enable the appellants to urge the grounds H and I. He accepted that grounds H and I were no....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....someone else, if it all, should be available in their Hard Disks/Laptop. In any case, the details in emails precisely correspond with the imports made, quantity, value etc. Emails indicate date, time and are over a period of years. The emails clearly indicate that the declared prices in the documents were not the real transaction value. Shri Rakesh Rathi was asked to explain such details and he did not state anything about this aspect but stated that the said emails are self explanatory. It is to be noted that Shri Rakesh Rathi as also Shri Gopal Rathi explained the contents of all the emails numbering about 400, so recovered. Even if one was to tamper the information, nobody can provide such details and therefore contents cannot be even ta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by the appellants, the following are the findings recorded : "5...Ld. Sr.Counsel also emphasized on the part of the statement of Rakesh Rathi, where he stated that "I am not in position to explain the discrepancy" and hence exercised the right of silence. We find that Ld. Sr.Counsel has read half of the sentence in the statement, remaining part of the sentence of the statement clearly stated that the emails are self explanatory. We do not find any force in the argument. Another main argument of Ld.Sr.Counsel was that they have produced the details of contemporaneous import made through various ports at value which are comparable to their declared value. We are not impressed with this argument. The whole case of the Revenue is based....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e present case and therefore direction and decision in that case are not relevant for the present case. Going to the financial hardship, we firstly note that even though the financial hardship was stated in the stay petition, the same was not supported by any document either in the stay petition or at the time of hearing. We also note that main appellant is partnership firm and from the investigation it is clear that for official accounts they declared only part of the actual prices of the goods. Thus official accounts of such firm would be manipulated and balance sheet of such firm will not be correct representative of their financial position..." (underline supplied) 15 The law laid down by the Apex Court in the case of the Co....