K.S. Venkataramani, Member (T)

1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 20-12-1988 passed by the Additional Collector of Customs, New Delhi. The facts, in brief, are as follows :

2. The appellants filed their Bill of Entry for warehousing dated 1-8-1987 at the Inland Container Depot (ICD), New Delhi for the clearance of a consignment described as decorative paper for laminates. An import licence dated 9-10-1986, being REP Licence issued under Appendix 17 of the Import Policy 1985-88 against product credit C. 11.1 for decorative paper for laminates was filed for the clearance of the goods. The Bill of Entry was marked to the Superintendent, CFS for examination of the goods on 1-8-1987 with the direction to send sealed samples to the Assessing Officer and was, in its turn, marked to the Inspector by the Superintendent on 10-8-1987 and the goods were examined on 19-8-1987 and samples were drawn by the Inspector in the presence of the Customs House Agents (CHA) and the appellants, who were M/s. Om International, New Delhi and the importer's representative. After examination, the papers and the samples were presented before the Assessing Officer on 21-8-1987. Meanwhile, the CHA submitted a letter dated 21-8-1987 requesting that the yellow into - Bond bill of entry may be allowed to be converted into home consumption white bill of entry which was allowed by the Assistant Collector, ICD on the following day and the white bill of entry dated 22-8-1987 was filed. On 24-8-1987, the Assistant Collector, ICD received information that the goods declared as decorative paper for laminates were not as per declaration. The Assistant Collector, therefore, personally visited the CFS on the same day and found that the goods were different from the samples received earlier from the ICD. Thereafter, 100% examination of the goods was ordered by the Assistant Collector (ICD) on 25-8-1987 which examination was carried out on 27-8-1987 in the presence of the CHA, Proprietor of M/s. Mirah Decor, the Superintendent of Customs, CFS and the Superintendent of Customs, ICD. As a result of the examination, two cartons were found in excess containing 10 sample/catalogue books for wall paper. These two cartons were not mentioned in the Packing List attached to the Bill of Entry. The labels found on the goods indicated that the goods were not decorative paper for laminates but were wall paper. The samples of various designs, labels and from individual rolls of paper were drawn by the Department in the presence of the importer and his agents. Wall paper being a consumer goods item, is covered by S. No. 121 of Appendix 2B of the Import Policy 1985-88. This reads as follows :

"All consumer goods, howsoever described, of industrial, agricultural or animal origin, not appearing individually in Appendices 3, Part A and 5 or specifically listed for import under Open General Licence."

The Licence produced, therefore, the Customs House found, was not valid to cover the importation of wall paper and the Customs House was of the view that the import was unauthorised. Shri Anil Patil, Director of the Customs House Agents, M/s. Om International gave a statement on 2-9-1987 in which he said that on 19-8-1987 when the goods were first examined, he did not carry the Bill of Entry to CFS and that since the importer was himself present, he did not see the goods closely and that he was not present when the samples were sealed. He closely saw the goods on 27-8-1987 and the goods appeared to him to be the wall paper. Shri R.K. Goenka, Proprietor of the appellant firm in his statement on 3-9-1987, said that Shri Anil Patil was present at the time of examination of the goods at a close distance and he helped in the examination. He also said that the goods imported by him were designed to be used as wall paper. In subsequent statement dated 7-9-1987, Shri Patil admitted that the samples received at ICD were different from the goods imported and that he did not give the sampl