PARAS INDUSTRIES Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the Order -in -Appeal dated 9 -9 -2004 wherein confiscation of the goods imported and penalty imposed have been upheld.

(2.) THE relevant facts that arise for consideration are that the appellants imported 175 Nos. of industrial sewing machine from M/s. Brother International. The declaration made on the bill of entry in respect of these sewing machines was port of shipment as Singapore and country of origin as China. These sewing machines were imported by the appellants under EPCG licence No. 0330004053, dated 7 -8 -2003. When the goods were sought to be cleared the inspection of the goods revealed that the description on the goods found was "Brother Industries Ltd., Nagoya, Japan" and the country of origin China was not mentioned. On the presumption that the goods amounted to misdeclaration the said importers were directed to prove their bona fide. The appellants requested for waiver of show cause notice and sought adjudication of the matter. The adjudicating authority in his Order -in -Original dated 21 -10 -2003 came to the conclusion that since the intimation of country of origin is required on the packages, in the absence of which the appellants have contravened the provisions of Section 11[111] of the Customs Act, and hence, the goods are liable for confiscation under Section 11 [111](d) of the Customs Act, 1962 and also imposed penalty on the appellants under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act. On appeal by the appellants the appellate authority has also upheld the order on the identical grounds. Hence, this appeal.

(3.) LEARNED Advocate for the appellants submitted that the provisions of Section 11 [111] would be applicable only, in respect of goods covered under Sub -section (2)(s) of Section 117 of the Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958. He further submitted that under Notification No. 1272 issued under Section 117 of Trade and Merchandise Marks Act requires affixation of the country of origin on the goods when the goods on importation are for sale in India and not for consumption. He relies upon the Div. Bench decision in the case of Kumar Associates v. Collector of Customs and Filaments India Ltd. v. CC, New Delhi 2000 (123) E.L.T. 954 (Tribunal).