TALWAR BROS P LTD Vs. COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS
CUSTOMS EXCISE AND GOLD(CONTROL) APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) THIS is an appeal filed by the appellants against Orders passed by the Additional Collector of Customs in Order No. 276/90- A, dated 14-12-1990. In terms of that Order, he confiscated the goods in question holding that an attempt was made by the appellant to export the timber in sawn sizes by misdeclaring the same and since it was exported without valid licence the same was confiscated under Section 113(d) and (i) of the Customs Act, 1962.
(2.) The brief facts of the case are that the appellants entered for export, wood products which are processed or manufactured as per the shipping bill which is produced at page No. 50 of the Paper Book. The Department had information that the appellant is going to export the same by mis-declaring it. On examination, the Departmental Officers found the timber as not processed as declared in Bill of Entry. According to the Departmental officers, the subject goods would not be called as wood finished in the form which was sought to be exported. A Show Cause Notice was issued to the appellant and he replied the same. Personal hearing was granted. Finally, the Additional Collector held that the goods do not appear to be final finished product and that was very much in the primary stage of processing which could be referred as sawn timber. He also held that on inspection of goods in question they did not appear to be corresponding with the description given in the shipping bill. Accordingly, he held that the goods comes within the purview of the Schedule-I, Part-A, Serial No. 66(1) of Import and Export Policy 1990-1993. The goods were, therefore, confiscated and the appellant was allowed to redeem the same on payment of Rs. 30,000/- as redemption fine and penalty of Rs. 5,000/- was also imposed on the appellant.
Learned advocate, Shri Ashish Roy along with Director of the appellants' company, Shri Vijay Talwar appeared before me and Shri M.N. Biswas, learned S.D.R. appeared for the respondents.
(3.) SHRI Ashish Roy, learned Advocate contended that the goods in question is covered by OGL 3, Item No. 48(1). The description given therein is "Processed Timber of all Species." He also drew my attention to Schedule-I, Part-B, List 3 wherein at Serial No. 48(1), it is stated as follows:-
"Processed timber of all species except red sanding goods".
Relying on these entries, SHRI Ashish Roy contended that the goods in question are covered under OGL 3 and their export is permissible without a licence.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.