9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (11) TMI 196X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Commissioner of Customs, Kandla, are taken up for disposal together. 2.The facts are that M/s. Satyam Enterprises filed 8 DEEC Shipping Bills before the Customs authorities at Kandla for export of Indian Guargum treated and Pulverised. The exports are sought to be made on behalf of one M/s. Stonemann Mumbai, who applied for a DEEC licence. On verification the Customs authorities found that M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ping Bills) were converted into Free Shipping Bills and exports were allowed. Further investigation revealed that M/s. Satyam Enterprises exported the same goods under cover of 20 Shipping Bills, for their logged in a DEEC Book issued along with and another DEEC Licence No. 03025826, dated 13-10-98. However it was noticed that no import of the entitled chemicals stated in the licence took place. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sides. 6.The Commissioner imposes penalties under Section 114 of the Customs Act which stipulates that any person who in relation to any goods does or omits to do any act which act or omission would render such goods liable to confiscation under Section 113 or abates doing so or omission of such an act is liable for penalties. In the impugned order the Commissioner nowhere has held that the good ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ties cannot invoke the provisions of the Customs Act to impose penalties for some mis-declaraiton, if any, made before other authorities. In so far as the exports are concerned a correct declaration has been made in respect of the goods. We also observe that the Tribunal in the case of Fitwell Exports Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi [1999 (107) E.L.T. 221 (Tribunal)] held that it i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
