9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (4) TMI 208X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... without actually exporting one lakh pieces of garments.In view of the said fact, the appellant is not entitled to any other benefit than what was granted by the Tribunal. Appellant's contention that a sum of Rs. 7.00 lacs were deposited during the course of the investigation, therefore the said amount should be excluded from the amount of pre-deposit as ordered by the Tribunal is not acceptab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Annexure A/2) imposed penalty of Rs. 25.00 lacs on the appellant whereas a penalty of Rs. 5.00 lacs was imposed upon Mr. Anil Handa and Rs. 10.00 lacs on Mr. Bhushan Ghai. Such penalty was imposed for the reason that the appellant was found to have shown export fraudulently with mala fide intention of the facility granted to advanced license holders. It was found that the goods were not exported ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion from the period of limitation in filing the present appeal. The present appeal is treated to be within the period of limitation. Learned counsel for the appellant has vehemently argued that the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs on 20.5.2010 suffers from violation of principle of natural justice as the appellant was not given any opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses produced ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of pre-deposit as ordered by the Tribunal. We do not find that such concession can be granted to the appellant for the reason that such amount was mentioned in the application to seek waiver of pre-deposit filed before the Tribunal. Since, such fact was pointed out, we have no reason to find infer that the order of the Tribunal is not after considering the effect of such deposit. In view of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
