P.K. Kapoor, Member (T)

1. Since these three appeals arise out of the same order, they are disposed of by this common order.

2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on the basis of information that a consignment of six wooden cases declared to contain car cassette player parts of Japanese origin was consigned to M/s. Savitri Electronics Co. 59, Janta Nagar, Jaipur, a fictitious firm, the officers of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence detained the goods which were unloaded by the vessel 'Shinkai Maru' which arrived on 18-3-1986. On 4-4-1986 the goods were examined. It was found that the goods comprised of almost complete 'car cassette' players in CKD/SKD condition with only about 5% of the parts in terms of value not having been imported. In their letter dated 9-4-1986 M/s. Orient Shipping Agency (P) Ltd. informed the Department that under instructions from the suppliers in Tokyo the consignors' name had been amended and the new consignors were M/s. Esvee Enterprises, New Delhi. Neither M/s. Savitri Electronics Co. nor M/s. Esvee Enterprises filed any Bill of Entry for the clearance of the goods. Shri Onkar Bhardwaj appeared before the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence Officers on 13-11-1986 and deposed that one O.P. Vij obtained his signatures on blank letter heads for obtaining registration certificate from the Directorate of Industries, Jaipur and Import Licence from the Chief Controller of Imports and Exports in the name of the bogus concern M/s. Savitri Electronics. He admitted that he was being paid only small sums by Shri O.P. Vij who was financing the imports in the name of various non-existent concerns. Shri Soodesh Verma, proprietor M/s. Esvee Electronics when questioned by the D.R.I. officers deposed that he/his firm had no connection with M/s. Savitri Electronics Co. He claimed that he had written to the suppliers M/s. Kisho Shokai Yokohama, Japan on 23-12-1985 in connection with the intended import of components of 5000 car cassette players. He stated that in their letter dated 15-3-1986 M/s. Kisho Shokai had informed him that one of their clients had refused to retire two Bills and offered the goods to him. Shri Soodesh Verma claimed that the offer by the Japanese supplier was accepted by him but before he could retire the documents relating to the goods in question from Allahabad Bank, New Delhi, he learnt that the goods had been seized by the D.R.I. authorities.

3. After investigations, a show cause notice dated 26-8-1986 was issued to M/s. Savitri Electronics Co., Shri Onkar Nath Bhardwaj, M/s. Esvee Enterprises and M/s. Orient Ship Agency Pvt. Ltd. Thereafter in the impugned order dated 30-11-1987, the Additional Collector held that M/s. Savitri Electronics who had not responded to the show cause notice was a firm which had been floated solely for the purpose of importing electronic components without having any manufacturing facility with the intention of selling the imported components in the market. On the grounds that M/s. Savitri Electronics had not produced any valid Actual User Import Licence, the adjudicating authority held that the goods were liable to confiscation under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962. He rejected the claim made by M/s. Esvee Enterprises that they were entitled to clear the goods on the grounds that there was strong suspicion that they had come forward to claim the goods at the instance of the foreign suppliers or Shri O.P. Vij in order to prevent the confiscation of the seized goods. He observed that even though M/s. Esvee Enterprises had claimed the goods they had failed to establish that they were covered by a valid import licence on the date of import i.e. 18-3-1986. On these grounds he ordered the confiscation of the goods under Section 111(d) of the Customs Act, 1962. He further held that M/s. Savitri Electronics Co. and Shri O.N. Bhardwaj were liable for penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. The adjudicating authority refrained from i