9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (12) TMI 611X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lue (Rs.) Drawback amount claimed 1. 1228826 17-11-99 23/99-00 4-11-99 Children's skits 8100 20,82,271 22,90,498 3,33,163 2. 1228827 17-11-99 19/99-00 4-11-99 Children's skits 8100 20,82,271 22,90,498 3,33,163 3. 1228828 17-11-99 24/99-00 4-11-99 Children's skits 8700 22,36,458 24,60,104 3,57,868 4. 1228829 17-11-99 21/99-00 4-11-99 Children's skits 8100 20,82,271 22,90,498 3,33,163 5. 1228830 17-11-99 22/99-00 4-11-99 Children's skits 8100 20,82,271 22,90,498 3,33,163 6. 1228831 17-11-99 20/99-00 4-11-99 Children's skits 8100 20,82,271 22,90,498 3,33,163 TOTAL 49200 1,26,47,813 1,39,12,594 20,23,683 On specific information, officers of Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) inspected the consignment and after examination of the said Bills of Entry and drawing the representative samples under panchanama, the consignment was seized by Seizure memo dated 7-12-1999. Subsequent of such seizure, the residential premises of one of the Directors of M/s. Kanchi Impex Pvt. Ltd, and Shri Pundrik Trivedi were searched by the officers of DRI and documents were seized from there. During the course of investigation, the officers rec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d and the correct value was not more than Rs. 10/- per piece. Shri Suresh Pawar was holding the Customs pass for the CHA firm and dealt with the goods in transporting the same to the Docks, whereas the CHA firm had earlier declined to handle the consignment for export processing. (vi) The valuation report obtained by the DRI Offices for the samples of the frocks/skirts drawn from the consignment shows that the goods being exported herein were not valued more than Rs. 10/- per piece. The correct FOB value of the goods 49,200 pcs of the frocks/skirts thereby works out to only Rs. 4,92,000/- whereas the declared value was Rs. 1,26,47,813/- with the claim for the drawback for Rs. 20,23,683/-. The persons involved in the export were the same as above and the export values declared in the shipping bills were highly over valued to obtain drawback amount. (vii) The goods under export had been procured from different shops against cash payment at Ahmedabad and the value of the goods appears to be not more than Rs. 10/- per piece amounting totally to Rs. 4,92,000/-. However, M/s. Kanchi Impex Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad created false documents to show that the goods had been purchased from M/s. R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rity vide the impugned order confiscated all consignments sought to be exported, rejected the drawback claims and imposed penalty on all the noticees. The noticees herein have filed the appeal against such imposition of penalty. 5. Learned Counsel Shri S.N. Kantawala appears for the appellant Shri Sanjay N. Mehta (in appeal No. C/481/02). Shri Kantawala submits that there is no evidence against this appellant in the entire Order-in-Original. It is his submission that the appellant had nothing to do with the consignment and had only introduced principals and arranged for the meeting of the clearing agent. He draws our attention to the findings as has been recorded by the adjudicating authority in para 41. It is his submission that none of the persons had implicated the appellant at the initial stage. It is his submission that the imposition of penalty on the appellant under the provisions of Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962 is unwarranted and needs to be set aside. 6. Learned Counsel Shri Naresh Thacker is appearing for the appellant Shri Alpesh Shah (in appeal No. C/348/02). He submits that the appellant had nothing to do with the consignment. He submits that appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the statement of Shri Nayan Ramanlal Thakkar and submits that it very clearly inculpates that Shri Alpesh Shah and Sanjay Mehta used to take signatures on the blank cheque of the current account of Kanchi Impex Pvt. Ltd. It is submission of the learned SDR that Smt. Rupaben Thakkar was doing a tailoring job and could not had have (sic) resources to do export of this magnitude. 9. In a rejoinder, Mr. Naresh Thacker would submit that statements of Smt. Rupaben Thakkar and Shri Nayan Thakkar did not implicate the appellant Shri Alpesh Shah in their earlier statements, but was implicated subsequently. It is his submission that Revenue has relied upon their old statement on ground of excess drawback claim. It is his submission that Revenue has not issued any show cause notice for the earlier consignment cleared by the Kanchi Impex Pvt. Ltd. and this would indicate that Kanchi Impex Pvt. Ltd. was in existence and doing business. Shri Kantawala and Shri Naresh Thacker would point out reply filed by the Kanchi Impex Pvt. Ltd. and submit that Kanchi Impex Pvt. Ltd. had admitted the entire guilt and submitted that they are only responsible for this activity of overvaluation of export c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dverse inference has to be considered in proper perspective in order to penalize the appellants under the provisions of Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962. The goods are liable for confiscation for mis-declaration of the value and role played by Shri Sanjay Mehta and Alpesh Shah make them liable for imposition of penalty under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962. Considering the fact that M/s. Kanchi Impex Pvt. Ltd. in their reply to the adjudicating authority has claimed that the entire action was their own and also considering the fact that there is no retraction of statement of Directors, we find that Shri Alpesh Shah and Sanjay Mehta were, in fact, motivating force behind the entire case. In facts and circumstances of the case, we find that the penalty imposed on Shri Alpesh Shah and Sanjay Mehta under provision of Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962 is correct. At he same time, we find that the penalty imposed on them is excessive considering the fact that other noticees were also involved and the lesser penalty is imposed on them. To meet the ends of justice, penalty imposed on Shri Alpesh Shah and Shri Sanjay Mehta is reduced to Rs. 5 lakhs (rupees five lakhs) each from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
