TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (4) TMI 216
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e of Shri Mukesh Mittal was recorded on 15.09.2020, 18.09.2020 and 30.09.2020. The seizure memo also records that Shri Amit Mittal also admitted under valuation of the consignment. The seizure memo records as under:- Thereafter a corrigendum to the seizure memo was issued: 1.2 The appellant applied for provisional release of goods and vide order dated 31.12.2020 the Deputy Commissioner informed the appellant the terms of the provisional release provided by the Competent Authority as follows: " Further, it is to inform that said provisional release under Section 110A of the Customs Act, 1962 is subject to execution of Bond for full value with Bank Guarantee for 2.5 times of the duty amount of duty i.e. Rs. 2065915 x 2.5 = Rs. 5164787.50 (to cover fine and penalty on adjudication)." These terms were challenged before Commissioner (Appeals) who descripts the appeal. The appellants are before us. 2. Learned counsel for the appellants argued that the terms of the release are very stringent. She pointed out that the said order relies on the Circular No. 35/2017-Cus dated 16.08.2017. she pointed out that the said circular never provided guidelines for bond and securit....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....10A of the Customs Act. He pointed out that in cases where provisional release is offered to the appellant, in terms of Section 110A (2) second Proviso, the time limit for issue of Show Cause Notice within six months does not apply. He further pointed out that the case is still under investigation and Show Cause Notice can only be issued after completion of investigation. 4. We have considered rival contentions. 5. This appeal is against an order fixing the terms of provisional release of goods sought by the appellant. The value of goods is Rs. 1,91,91,322.23 and the approximate differential duty comes to Rs. 20,65,915/-. The competent authority has fixed the terms of provisional release as a bond equal to goods and bank guarantee equal to 2.5% times the duty amount. The competent authority has relied on circular no. 35 of 2017-Cus dated 16.08.2017. Para 2 of the said circular reads as follows: 2. While provisional release of seized imported goods under Section 110A of the Customs Act, 1962 may normally be considered by the competent adjudicating authority upon a request made by the owner of the seized goods, provisional release shall not be allowed in the following ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oods seized were imported goods. The grounds of appeal do not contest the quantification of duty on merits as there is no specific arguments in the appeal memorandum or in the written submissions filed by the appellant except some general statements. 7. The next issue raised by the appellant relates to the fact that though the seizure was made on 13.10.2022, no notice has been issued till date. The appellant has relied on the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in Writ Petition No. 5593 of 2021 in case of Indosheel Mould Ltd. to assert that in such cases the seizure itself should be vacated. We find that the seizure was made on 13.10.2020 and the said seizure order is not subject matter of challenged in the present proceedings. The entire appeal of the appellant before the lower authorities as well as Tribunal is only for the relaxation in the terms of Provisional release, there has not been any challenge to seizure before lower authorities. 8. Now coming to the quantum of security fixed by the lower authorities, we find that in the instant case, the goods were cleared from the Customs area and were lying in the premises of the appellant. Part of the goods were further p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....SHEET (100-110) 29390.20 Kgs. 0 29390.20 10 S.S.COIL/SHEET (7219) 37272.00 Kgs. 0 37272.00 11 S.S.CIRCLE (95-110) $3742.95 Kgs. 27588.95 26154 12 SS COIL/SS SHEET(110-120) 90703.95 Kgs. 0 90703.95 13 S.S.COIL (80-90) 93975.63 Kgs. 42266.63 51709 14 S.S.COIL (JOB) 119004.00 Kgs. 0 119004. 449731.39 Kgs 69855.58 379875.81 3. In this regard, Statement of Shri Mukesh Mittal, Proprietor of M/s Mukesh Steel was recorded on 19.08.2020, 11.09.2020 , 14.09.2020, 21.09.2020 and 29.09.2020 wherein he admitted that since July 2019 he had imported consignments by the way of undervaluation. He stated that his uncle Shri Amit Mittal, proprietor of a firm namely M/s Mukesh Steel Trading and looked after their import. Further, statement of Shri Amit Mittal, was recorded on 15.09.2020, 18.09.2020 and 30.09.2020 wherein he also confirmed the undervaluation of the consignments of Coils imported from M/s MCH Steel Industry Co. Ltd, China in the name M/s Mukesh Steel, M/s Mukesh Steel Trading Document 2 DIN-202010DDZ400004D93FE 5. From the ledger of M/s ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....IL (JOB) 119004.00 Kgs. 9. Accordingly, goods mentioned and summarized in Table-B detained vide detention memo dated 11.02.2020 are hereby seized under provision of Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962. 10. The aforesaid goods mentioned in Table-B above detained under panchnama dated 11.02.2020 shall remain in the custody of the person to whom detained goods were handed over for safe custody. Lend •13/06/2020 Auk कà¥à¤²à¤¦à¥‡à¤µ akul •Torch Office wakul Dev) Intelligence Officer DRI, Delhi Zonal Unit Dir 17 Document 3 DIN-202010DDZ400006JE742 GOVERNMENT OF INDIA DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE DELHI ZONAL UNIT B-3&4, 6TH FLOOR, PARYAVARAN BHAWAN, CGO COMPLEX, LODHI ROAD NEW DELHI-110003 F.No. DRI/DZU/23/ENQ-02/2020/2919 Corrigendum to Seizure Memo dated 13.10.2020 Dated: 26.10.2020 In the Seizure Memo dated 13.10.2020 issued vide File No. DRI/DZU/23/ENQ-02/2020 by an Intelligence Officer, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Delhi Zonal Unit, New Delhi following amendment may be noted: a. Last line in para 3 may now be read as "Further, stateme....