9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (2) TMI 588X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h, (4) Shri Puneet S. Agarwal, (5) Shri Chetan, V. Thakkar, (6) Shri Premal J. Doshi, (7) M/s. Mukadam M. Liladhar, (8) Shri Rushabh Shah, (9) Shri Dhanraj S. Shah, (10) Shri Kamlesh L. Kotak, (11) Shri Sharadchandra P. Shah and (12) Shri Bhupendra Mehta (hereinafter referred to as the co-applicants ) Sr. 1 to 11 filed on 27-7-2004 and Sr. No. 12 on 7-10-2004. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE 2. M/s. Deluxe Kaaran Imports Pvt. Ltd. (applicant) had obtained from the DGFT, Mumbai two actual user Advance Licence Nos. 0310179641, dated 21-1-2003 and 0310178492, dated 15-1-2003 under the DEEC Scheme in January 2003 for duty free import of HDPE/LDPE granules valued at Rs. 3,77,51,679/-. The goods to be exported was Tarpaulin. In the Advance Licence, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Port). 4. The applicant filed application for settlement on 8-7-2004. The applicant has admitted duty liability of Rs. 1,48,74,192/-. S/Shri Minesh D. Shah, Deepesh Shah @ Nanubhai, Kalpesh Shah, Puneet S. Agarwal, Chetan, V. Thakkar, Premal J. Doshi, Rushabh Shah, Dhanraj S. Shah, Kamlesh L. Kotak, Sharadchandra P. Shah and M/s. Mukadam M. Liladhar, co-noticees in the instant SCN, filed applications for settlement on 27-7-2004. Shri Bhupendra Mehta, another co-noticee in the instant SCN, filed application for settlement on 7-10-2004. 5. The admission hearing in the case was held on 23-11-2004 and the Bench allowed all the applications to be proceeded with under section 127C(1) of the Customs Act, 1962 vide Interim Order No. 56/CUS/200 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecords and pleas putforth by the applicant as well as the Revenue. The Bench finds that in this case, the duty admitted is equal to the duty demanded in the show cause notice. Accordingly, the following conditions are laid down under Section 127C(7) of the Customs Act, 1962 for settlement of this case. Customs Duty : The amount of Customs duty in this case is settled at Rs. 1,48,74,192/-. Since the same had been paid, nothing further remains payable on this score. Fine, Penalty and Prosecution : The applicant in this case has made a full and true disclosure of its duty liability and also co-operated with the Bench throughout the course of the proceedings of this case. In view of this conduct of the applicant and the co-applicants, immun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
