Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + HC Central Excise - 2008 (10) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2008 (10) TMI 344 - HC - Central ExciseDEPB Scrips obtained by producing forged documents - DEPB Scrips were cancelled Held that - documents being forged, the appellant could not be allowed to take advantage of exemption
Issues:
1. Appeal under section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962 against the order of the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal regarding duty demand on imported goods against DEPB Scrips obtained through forged documents. Analysis: The appeal was filed against the order confirming the demand of duty on imported goods obtained against DEPB Scrips procured through forged bank certificates. The DEPB Scrips were canceled by the competent authority, leading to the confirmation of duty demand. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner of Customs' decision that concessions based on forged DEPB Scrips cannot be retained. In a previous order, the court considered similar issues and referred to various judgments, including those of the Supreme Court and High Courts, emphasizing that benefits obtained through forged documents cannot be allowed. The principle that a purchaser does not acquire a better title than the seller was highlighted, along with the duty charge under Section 12 of the Act, irrespective of any person's intention. The Tribunal found that since the documents were forged and the firm involved in the transaction was untraceable, the appellant could not benefit from any exemptions. The appellant had acknowledged the forgery, and the Tribunal's decision to deny further opportunities was deemed appropriate. References were made to judgments by the Supreme Court and the High Court to support this decision. Ultimately, the court dismissed the appeal, stating that there were no grounds to interfere with the order upholding the duty demand on goods obtained through DEPB Scrips acquired through forged documents. It was concluded that no substantial question of law arose in this matter, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.
|