9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (3) TMI 752X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Order per : J.H. Joglekar, Member (T)]. The facts leading to this application are as under : 2. The applicant, Shri Suresh Agarwal was the proprietor of M/s. Ishaan Exports and the sole authorised person of M/s. Asheema Fashion Pvt. Ltd.; M/s. Asheema Exports and M/s. Ishaan International of Ahmedabad. The Commissioner of Customs (Adjudication), Mumbai had imposed penalty of Rs. 4 crores o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hearing of his appeal. In making this order, the Tribunal observed that the claim of financial hardship was not supported by any documentation. Subsequently, a miscellaneous application was filed. Relying upon the income tax returns and certificates of bank balances plea of hardship was made. 4. However, during the hearing of the application, Shri J.M. Patel, Counsel took a different ground. He ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wer order and reinstated the licence. 6. This order shows that he was dealing with the issues before him as to the validity of the licences in the situation explained before him. In page 13 of his order, he has left open the issue of the proceedings of the Customs authorities and has in fact declared that his order may not offer any assistance to the appellant in that regard. This is clear from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rt of Customs formations in documentation. Therefore, at this stage it is not possible for us to accept the claim made by Shri Patel that since the licences were valid at the time of importation, duty free imports were legally made and therefore no duty was chargeable and no penalty was leviable. It is too tall a claim to make on the basis of the order of the Additional DGFT which itself leaves th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
