2014 (8) TMI 79

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... aken up together for hearing as the related appeals arise from the same impugned order. 2. The first applicant, Shri R. Ramesh is the manager of a CHA firm namely M/s. Glow Freight Logistics Pvt. Ltd. and the second applicant, Shri K. Shanmugam is Executive (Operations) of the said CHA firm. 3. The CHA firm had filed shipping bill No.2093321 dt. 25.10.2006 at ICD Whitefield, Bangalore for export .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... mpugned order. Aggrieved by the order, the applicants have filed these appeals before the Tribunal along with stay petitions. 4. Arguing for the applicants, the learned advocate submits that neither the SCN nor the adjudication order brings out anything specific to show that applicants were aware of the goods concealed. They had bonafide belief about the correctness of the contents of the contain .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d to be "handicrafts" which were classifiable under heading 4421 eligible for drawback, the CHA had filed shipping bill indicating classification of 4407 where no drawback is eligible. According to the A.R., this shows that there was a clear attempt by the CHA and the exporter to evade examination of goods by customs because the goods covered by drawback claims are subjected to stricter examinatio .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X