2007 (3) TMI 245

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ion 28(1) on ground of wilful misstatement or suppression of facts, is not justified - setting aside of demand on the point of limitation by Commissioner (Appeals) is legal and proper. - C/116/2005 - A/729/2007-WZB/AHD - Dated:- 23-3-2007 - Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (J) Shri M.M. Mathkar, JDR, for the Appellant. Shri Sudhir Gupta, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order]. - Being agg .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... fraudulently and vide Order-in-original dated 24-10-01, the said DEPB licences were cancelled ab initio. 3. In view of the above backgrounds, the issue which emerges as to whether the imports which have been already effected by the respondent before the cancellation of licences, would be denied the benefit of duty free importation. Commissioner (Appeals) held on the said point against the resp .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... xporter resulting in clearances of imported goods without payment of duty by importer and as such, Revenue should be allowed to recover the customs duty. 5. After considering the above statements, I find that the duty demand was made against the respondent under the provisions of Section 28(1) of the Customs Act which allows invocation of longer period in case of collusion, wilful misstatemen .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X