9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (7) TMI 553X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 'Desai, Sunil Verma, Anoop Kumar Wadhera and Nirmal J. Agarwal (hereinafter referred to as the 'co-Applicants') was held on 13-7-2004 when Shri Sujay Kantawala, Advocate argued the case on behalf of all the applicants. S/Shri M.L. Grover, Advocate, Sunil Verma, Shri Uday J. Desai and A.K. Wadhera also remained present. 2. An information was received by the officers of the DRI, Mumbai to the effect that M/s. Frost International Ltd. (applicant) was misusing the Advance Licence Scheme by exporting inferior substitute material misdeclaring it as Garlic Powder. Intelligence also suggested that the goods imported duty free under the Advance Licence obtained by the applicant viz. Garlic (bulbs) had been diverted and sold in the domestic ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (bearing Nos. FSCL 3102263 and CRXU 1111791), each declared to contain 25.020 MT (i.e. 417 bags x 60 Kgs) Garlic Powder valued at Rs. 14,12,759.30 (each) were examined vide Panchanama; one of the containers was found to contain 419 bags and the other 414 bags. The goods stuffed in the said containers were found to be made of earthy matter except for 11 bags x 50 Kgs (550 Kgs) of garlic powder in one container and 14 bags x 50 Kgs (700 Kgs) of garlic powder in the other. Samples of all these were drawn and the test reports confirmed that the goods found as garlic powder were of inferior quality i.e. with 5 to 28% of Ash content and remaining siliceous matter (aluminium silicate)/earthy matter with traces of organic matter. The goods in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rs. 67 lakhs was indented and cleared by Shri Nirmal Agarwal acting as an Agent of the applicant. None of the above duty free imported goods were received in the factory of the declared supporting manufacturer M/s. Deepak Agro Products, Neemuch. That the entire quantity of the goods so imported duty free were disposed of in the domestic market for profit through Shri Nirmal Agarwal and one Shri Sunil N. Shah, a commission agent in garlic based at Navi Mumbai and some other unidentified persons. 4. The above act of obtaining Advance Licence by misdeclaration, diversion of duty free imported goods into domestic market for profit, stuffing of worthless substitute earthy matter in export container, misdeclaration of such material in all ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... notice from the DGFT. In this regard, he referred to the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court decision in the case of M/s. Mahendra Petrochemicals Ltd. v. Union of India reported in [2004 (165) E.L.T. 499 (Guj.) = 2004 (93) ECC 526 (Guj.)] on the basis of which the application may be admitted. He also referred to the Larger Bench decision in the case of M/s. Crest Communication Ltd. reported in 2003 (152) E.L.T. 452 (Sett. Comm.) regarding the Commission's wide powers. 9. The Commission drew attention of the ld. Advocate to the fact that the notice has been issued by the DGFT authority to the applicant only and not to the four co-applicants. The ld. Advocate submitted that in the Remand Application filed before the Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h container. He also submitted that the notice by DGFT, Kanpur is silent about export of clay powder. 11. The Commission pointed out to the ld. Advocate that for: the import of 390 MTs of garlic bulbs at Chennai Port, this Bench has no jurisdiction. The ld. Advocate submitted that since the entire case has been investigated by the DRI, Mumbai Unit, the four co-applicants were arrested by DRI, Mumbai, the duty involved in the case is not in dispute and the same has also been deposited at Mumbai and most probably after the investigations, DRI, Mumbai will be issuing the SCN, the entire case may be admitted by this Bench. 12. The Commission has gone through the case records and the pleas putforth by the applicant as well as the Rev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le Gujarat High Court judgment discussed above. 13. In that application made under Section 127B ibid, we however find that against col. 9 regarding date of seizure, if any, there is a positive assertion about no seizure of any goods or accounts which appears to be factually incorrect in the face of seizure of goods effected on 17-4-2004 and 30-4-2004 and that of documents on 20-4-2004. But for the purpose of admission of this application, the inaccuracy pointed out is ignored for the time being. 14. The application has been filed for the total duty liability on account of imports effected through Mumbai as well as Chennai ports. Since the jurisdiction of this Bench does not extend over Chennai, we cannot entertain the applicatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
