COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (PREV.), SHILLONG Vs. SRI SANGPUIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) REVENUE is in appeal against an order of Commissioner (Appeals) who vide the impugned order found as follows : -

(2.) (a) The learned Commissioner (Appeals) observed in para 6 of his Order - I have gone through the case records very carefully. The appellant in this case has raised a very valid point that the confiscated goods are of foreign origin or not? As the goods are not available for examination, the examination is restricted to the relied upon documents only. From the available records it cannot be confirmed that the goods are of foreign origin and contraband in nature. This observation is not based on facts. Commissioner (Appeals) had failed to consider all aspects of the seizure and had failed to discuss other aspects of the case. Commissioner (Appeals) had set aside the Order -in -Original (confiscating the goods and imposing Personal Penalty on the Appellant) solely on his conclusion that the goods are not foreign goods. His conclusion that the goods are not foreign goods lacked objectively. The brand names (brand names which are commonly used on Chinese goods) are given for the goods in Sr. Nos. 1, 2, 4, 6 and 7 of Annexure -A of Seizure Inventory. The goods are still lying in the Customs Godown in Shillong and can be inspected any time if required.

(3.) AFTER hearing both sides and considering the material on record we find : -