9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (1) TMI 1349 - AT - CustomsSmuggling - export of sandalwood chips - Certificate of origin of the goods produced by the appellants was fake and fabricated - Held that - Perusal of the grounds of appeal and pleadings of the appellants in the appeal memorandum, no where discloses that the certificate produced by it was genuine - There is nothing on the record to show that the appellant has not defraud customs. Modus operandi of the appellants exhibits that it had a predetermined mind to defraud Revenue - appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.
Issues: Alleged fraudulent export of sandalwood chips in violation of EXIM Policy, 1997; Fabrication of certificate of origin; Confiscation of goods; Imposition of penalty under Customs Act, 1962.
The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, CHENNAI, involved the appeal of a case where the appellant was accused of attempting to export 200 gunny bags of sandalwood chips in violation of the EXIM Policy, 1997. The adjudicating authority found that the goods were not permissible for export and were confiscated due to a fabricated Certificate of origin. The certificate falsely claimed the buyer as M/s. Divya Impex Corporation, Hyderabad, procuring goods from a non-existent source, Shri R. S. Ramanujam. Investigation revealed that the certificate was fake and designed to defraud Revenue, as confirmed by the Divisional Forest Officer. The authority also discovered the non-existence of M/s. Divya Impex Corporation at the claimed premises in Hyderabad. The adjudicating authority justified the confiscation of the goods and imposed a penalty of &8377; 1,50,000 on the appellants under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962. The grounds of appeal and appellant's pleadings failed to establish the genuineness of the certificate or the existence of the alleged buyer and source of goods. The tribunal upheld the authority's decision, stating that the appellant had a predetermined intent to defraud Revenue, with no evidence to the contrary. The modus operandi of the appellants clearly indicated fraudulent intentions, leading to the confirmation of the adjudicating authority's order and the dismissal of the appeal.
|
