TRUWOODS PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. COMMR. OF CUSTOMS, VISAKHAPATNAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN all these appeals and stay petitions, the issue involved is one and the same . Hence, we are taking up the matter and pass a common order. Two Private Limited Companies viz. M/s. Truwoods Private Limited and M/s. Maxworth Plywood Private Limited are the importers of Wood Veneers. Two orders have been issued in respect of M/s. Truwoods Private Limited and one order for M/s. Maxworth Plywood Private Limited. Penalties have been imposed on the Director of M/s. Maxworth Plywood Private Limited and the Chief Executive of M/s. Truwoods Private Limited. Therefore, six appeals have been filed.

(2.) THE appellants imported Wood Veneers. In respect of both the appellants, the period of import ranges from 1997 to 2000. Initially, the goods were cleared on payment of duty on the basis of the value declared by the appellants. These values are the invoice values forwarded to the appellants. The foreign supplier of wood veneers is M/s. Pargan Singapore Pte. Ltd., Singapore. Payments have been made through banking channel. The Customs Department, long after the import, after certain investigations, came to the conclusion that the import of wood veneers had been generally undervalued by the appellants. The allegation is based on certain documents obtained from the Italian/Spanish Customs. Proceedings were initiated against the appellants for re -determination of the assessable value. Penalties under Sections 112(a) and 114A were proposed. After completing the formalities of adjudication, the Commissioner passed the impugned orders. The appellants are highly aggrieved over the impugned orders. Hence, they have come before this tribunal for waiver of pre -deposit and also for deciding the issue. It was brought to our notice that the issue is covered in the case of one of the appellants M/s. Truwoods Private Limited, by the decision of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Truwoods Pvt. Ltd. v. CC, Visakhapatnam - 2005 (186) E.L.T. 135 (Tri. -Delhi) in partys favour. Therefore, we are taking up both the stay applications and the appeals for decision.

(3.) SHRI G. Shiva Dass, the learned Advocate and Shri G. Venkatesh, the learned Consultant appeared for the appellants and Shri R.K. Singla, the learned JCDR for the Revenue. The learned Advocate urged the following points : -