9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (5) TMI 530X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... xure P.9). 2. The petitioner had earlier filed on application dated 5-7-2000 in the office of Joint Director General of Foreign Trade, Ludhiana, for obtaining the DEPB for Rs. 4,54,991/-. They also submitted a copy of the shipping bill No. 002276 showing export of 10237 kgs of Spanners for a FOB value of Rs. 26,19,375/-. The shipping amount was shown to be made on 31-3-2000 and they were issued DEPB @ applicable on that day. The value cap of Rs. 60/- kg. for the purpose of issuance of DEPB on the export of spanners has been imposed by the Government w.e.f. 1-4-2000. The application is alleged to be ante-dated as the cargo receipt register maintained by M/s. Overseas Ware Housing Pvt. Ltd. Ludhiana showed that cargo was received in the War ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7-9-2006 they were directed to submit pre-deposit of penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/- within a period of eight weeks from the date of issuance of the order failing which the appeal was to be decided without granting any further opportunity. When the afore-mentioned order was not complied with the appeal was also dismissed on 21-2-2007 by observing as under : I have gone through the facts of the case available on record and the submission made by the appellant firm. It has been observed from the Order-in-original, which is a very comprehensive order, that the appellants has ante-dated the date of exports to avail undue higher benefit of DEPB. As per the Hon ble Punjab and Haryana High Court s order dated 1-8-2005, in CWP No. 3259 of 2006, the ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he learned Counsel and perusing the record, we are of the considered view that once the petitioner has submitted the pre-deposit on 27-1-2007 we would direct the appellate authority - Addl. Director General of Foreign Trade to take up the appeal of the petitioner and decide the same on merits accordance with law. We are further of the view that the appellate authority should not have expressed any thing on merits and recorded a finding as is evident from the perusal of para 5 of the impugned order which has been reproduced in the preceding para of the judgment. Such a course was not available to the appellate Authority. Therefore, the order dated 22-1-2007 is liable to be set aside. 6. In view of the above, the order dated 22-1-2007 (Anne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
