Page 196 - ELT_3rd_1st May 2020_Vol 372_Part

418 EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 372

of document from appellants premises and also from sample tested - Taking of
samples of previous consignment, if any, for chemical/physical testing or val-
uation purposes, not material, if the fact that the said goods were produced in
a workshop by mixing gold, sand and other materials is suppressed - Elaborate
mechanism for hoodwinking Customs devised by appellant with intention to
evade Customs duty - Demand of duty and interest on past consignments up-
held - Penalty under Section 114A of Customs Act, 1962, in respect of past con-
signments also upheld - Section 28 of Customs Act, 1962. [para 8.1]
Penalty on partner - Penalty when imposed on the firm, separate pen-
alty on partner cannot be imposed under Section 114A of Customs Act, 1962.
[para 9]
Appeals partly allowed
CASES CITED
Commissioner v. Jai Prakash Motwani — 2010 (258) E.L.T. 204 (Guj.) — Relied on ............... [Paras 2.9, 9]
Union of India v. Jain Shudh Vanaspati Ltd. — 1996 (86) E.L.T. 460 (S.C.) — Referred ................. [Para 3]
REPRESENTED BY : Shri P.M. Dave, Advocate, for the Appellant.
Shri L. Patra, Assistant Commissioner (AR), for the
Respondent.
[Order per : Raju, Member (T)]. - These appeals have been filed by M/s.
Mulchand M. Zaveri (hereinafter referred to as M/s. MMZ) and it’s partner Shri
Sanjay Kumar Mulchandbhai Patel (hereinafter referred to as Shri Sanjay Patel)
against confirmation of demand of Customs duty, imposition of penalty and con-
fiscation of goods.
2. The appellants had imported certain goods declaring the same as
‘Natural Gold Ore Concentrate’. The appellants have been importing goods with
the said description of ‘natural gold ore concentrate’ for some time. After fifteen
consignments (one imported through Mumbai and not subject matter of this no-
tice) of the said product having been cleared by Customs, the 16th consignment
was stopped. The Bill of Entry No. 4434128 for the 16th consignment was submit-
ted to Ahmedabad Customs for assessment. The goods were sought to be classi-
fied under Customs Tariff Heading 2616 90 10 claiming Basic Customs duty
(BCD) at the rate 2.5% and nil CVD by virtue of Notification No. 12/2012-C.E.,
dated 17 March, 2012 (Serial No. 56). All import documents like purchase orders,
Dubai customs clearance declaration, packing list, testing report etc. were sub-
mitted with bill of entry. The said consignment was seized by Directorate of Rev-
enue Intelligence (DRI) on the basis of intelligence to the effect that the appel-
lants were importing by misdeclaring the goods as ‘Natural Gold Ore Concen-
trate’ and wrongly claiming the benefit of notification. The goods were examined
under Panchanama. Thereafter, statements of Shri Rohit Harishrao Jadav, Senior
Executive of M/s. C.N. Gandevia Clearing and Forwarding Agent was recorded.
M/s. MMZ were declaring the imported goods as Gold Ore Concentrate since
December, 2013. Shri Rohit Harishrao Jadav in his statement dated 24 January,
2014 stated that the imports made earlier were similar to the one imported vide
Bill of Entry No. 4434128, dated 23 January, 2014 and examined under Pan-
chanama dated 24 January, 2014. Regarding the physical appearance of the earli-
er consignments, he stated that the same were “reddish coloured lumps of mud
containing yellow coloured metal particles. During investigations certain
EXCISE LAW TIMES  1st May 2020  196