2005 (7) TMI 432

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... P.S. Bajaj, Member (J)]. The above captioned appeals have been directed against the common Order-in-Original and are as such being disposed of by this common order. 2. The facts, as borne out from the record, are that Shri Pankaj Soni, proprietor of M/s. Harikishan Overseas exported 52,000 pieces of CD ROMs under DEPB License. He, however, transferred two licenses of those to two companie .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ne through the records. 5. So far as confirmation of duty against M/s. Harikishan Overseas is concerned, the contention of the Counsel that it could not be done legally, in our view, deserves to be accepted. The duty, as per law, could be confirmed against the importers of the goods i.e. M/s. Volvo India (P) Ltd. and G.G. Photo Ltd. The duty against both these companies, who were made the notice .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... mposed on the appellants. He has referred, in this context, the Apex Court judgment in the case of Union of India v. Sampat Raj Dugar reported in 1992 (58) E.L.T. 163 (S.C.). But we are unable to accept his contention. From the record, we find that the DEPB Licenses were cancelled on the ground of over-invoicing of the exported goods. We do not find sufficient ground to disagree with these finding .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X