9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 1008X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Cus/75923/2014 - Order No. FO/A/77318-77319/2017 - Dated:- 7-7-2017 - Shri P. K. Choudhary, Hon ble Judicial Member Shri A. K. Shukla, Adv. For (Sl No.2), None, (Sl No.1) for the Appellant Shri. S. K. Naskar, A.C. (AR) for the Respondent ORDER Per Shri P. K. Choudhary The facts of the case in brief are that a Show Cause Notice dated 28.02.2006 was issued in respect of import of goods declared as Crude Palm Oil (Non-edible grade) by Jhunjhunwala Vanaspati Ltd (JVL). It has been alleged that M/s JVL by manipulating the high sea sale agreement showing M/s ACI Oils (P) Ltd. as High sea sales buyer. Cleared the imported goods on concessional rate of duty. It was found that JVL diverted the imported goods in the open marke ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... used as the high seas buyer/importer for the imported goods which facilitated the subject illegitimate import. It is not the case that M/s ACI was not in existence or was not knowing that their name was being used as the high seas buyer. Rather they issued a letter of authority authorizing Shri Sanjit Kumar to sign the documents on their behalf, although Shri Kumar was an employee of M/s JVL. M/s ACI did not lodge any complaint against M/s JVL or Shri Sanjit Kumar for misuse of their status, if any. 21.1 Investigation proved that ACI did not have availed IEC No, which nullified its status as importer. Further investigation has proved that ACI was not at all registered with Central Excise Authority in terms of the Customs (Import of G ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mport of such items sold / transferred on high seas basis and particularly the implication on duty for the change of the status of the importer associated therewith as happened in the present case. As already discussed, crux of this case is that M/s JVL (noticee No. 1) and M/s ACI (Noticee No. 9) wanted the transfer of title/ ownership of the goods to be only on paper and the CHA had clear access to those papers which bore proof of the illegitimacy of such purported transfer but failed to bring this to the notice of the department. Thus, as an authorized CHA, the notice No. 10, had failed to discharge their responsibility properly legally in dealing with the subject goods which they knew were liable for confiscation under Section 11 1 (d), ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
