9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (6) TMI 341X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Nirmal Agarwal, for the Assessee. S/Shri V.K. Singh, Dy. Director and Tejram, Sr. Int. Officer, DRI, for the Department. [Order]. This order disposes of the Misc. Application filed on 31-3-2005 by the Addl. Director General, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as the Revenue) for withdrawing the immunity granted to M/s. Frost International Ltd. (herei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sion allowed the application to be proceeded with under Section 127C(1) of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereinafter called the said Act) and also finally settled the case by confirming the Customs duty at Rs. 1,18,29,253/-. The Commission further granted full immunity to the applicant from fine penalty and prosecution under the relevant provisions of the said Act. 4. The Review Application filed by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and hence the show cause notice dated 27/28-1-2005 issued by the D.R.I in relation to export of earthy materials can be proceeded against the respondent. The ld. Dy. Director further went on to argue that the respondent has suppressed these material facts before the Commission and mislead the Commission by stating that it had been cheated by the supporting manufacturers. Consequently, the immunity ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... acts of the case. The Revenue had argued all these points now raised at the time of final hearing. It is unfair on the part of the Revenue to seek review of the order passed by the Commission. The respondent had already admitted and paid the entire duty foregone. If the Revenue is aggrieved by the order of the Commission it should approach a higher forum. In this connection the ld. Counsel for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on and hence the plea of the respondent could not be altogether brushed aside. 8. The Final Order settled the case as a whole including the 7 exports as would be evident. Hence there is no need for any clarification. No evidence having been brought before the Bench in terms of sub-section (3) of Section 127H of the Act in the Miscellaneous Application, there appears no cause for withdrawal of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
