TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (8) TMI 556
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ishable u/sec. 46 r/w Section 135 (1)(a), 135(1)(i) of the Customs Act 1962. 2. It is alleged by the applicant / accused that the applicant is falsely implicated in the present case. It is the case of the applicant that the accused Sagar Shah director of importing company has been arrested on 24.05.2023. The applicant apprehends that he may be arrested in connection with the aforesaid offence, on the basis of statement recorded by the officers of the respondent. It is alleged that the applicant had finalized the deal with said accused Sagar Shah. The rough diamond are completely duty free. The respondent assumption is that there is gross over valuation of goods, custody of the applicant is unwarranted. The value of the goods is subject m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....learance of 1584.21 ct. of rough diamond imported under invoice dated 25.04.2023. The importer declared the value of goods as Rs. 19,70,95,683.44. Subject goods were referred to Single Member Panel, which held the value to be fair. However, specific intelligence was received regarding gross over valuation of the goods. The subject consignment was referred to three Member Expert Panel for valuation which valued goods at Rs. 13,29,53,607/The subject goods were found to be overvalued by Rs. 6,41,42,076. The said goods were seized by seizure memo dated 23.05.2023 for mis declaration in terms of value and other material descriptions. It was revealed that IEC remained dormant for over 6 years and the holder suddenly imports the current high value....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e prosecution apprehends that the applicant / accused if released on bail will destroy the evidence, will tamper with the prosecution witnesses. 7. The advocate for the applicant has relied upon the following judgments : 1. Commissioner of Customs V/s. Kiran Gems Pvt. Ltd. 2023 (6) TMI 1015 - CESTAT MUMBAI 2. Prerak Pankaj Shah V/s. Appraising Officer of Customs and Anr. in ABA 2113 of 2022 3. Pankaj Bansal V/s. State (Gove. Of NCT Of Delhi) in B.A.2031/2023 CRI. M.A. 1639016391/ 2023 4. Sahil Diamonds Pvt. Ltd. V/s. Commissioner of Customs, Ahmedaba 2010 (250) E.L.T. 310 (Tri. Ahmd.) 5. Manishbhai Narshibhai Talaviya V/s. Union of India in 2023-TIOL-523-HC-MUM-GST 6. Satender Kumar A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....for such import no purchase order proof of deals are produced. They do not know their overseas suppliers. The company has no manufacturing unit nor any arrangement with any manufacturer. There was no domestic order from domestic manufacturers / retailers. The prosecution raised doubt that the accused has no subsequent plan for sale or manufacturing or importing such diamond. According to the prosecution the accused Sagar Shah in his statement recorded u/Sec.108 of Customs Act, 1962 stated that the present applicant is the one who got this deal. He also stated that for the said deal he was offered 0.30% (30 paise) commission on the total value of the shipment. The prosecution has further stated that the said accused has submitted whatsapp ch....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... The statement u/Sec. 108 of the Customs can be relied upon. The statement revealed the involvement of the applicant in the commission of offence. There is substance in the prosecution case that there is mis declaration in terms of value of the goods. It appears that diamond in the form which were recovered appears to be prohibited goods. The prosecution is suspecting Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing activities behind import of such diamond. Custodial interrogation of the present applicant is just and necessary. If prearrest bail is allowed, it will derail the investigation which is in progress. The aforesaid citation relied upon by the applicant relating to merit of case are not helpful to the applicant at this stage. If the invest....