2006 (4) TMI 315 - AT - Customs

Tribunal Affirms Duty Demand Due to Forged DEPB Scrips; Legal Precedents Found Inapplicable in Upholding Revenue's Position.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, affirming the duty demand of Rs. 1,40,149 due to the invalidity of DEPB Scrips obtained through forgery. Despite the ... Demand duty - cancellation of DEPB Scrip - whether duty is demandable when DEPB Scrips obtained by producing forged documents and subsequently the same cancelled by the competent authority - HELD THAT:- As in the present case DEPB Scrips were obtained by producing forged documents, hence any concession availed on such DEPB Scrips remains null and void and would not acquire legal validity at any time. Therefore, we find no infirmity in the impugned order whereby duty was demanded from the appellants. The appeal is dismissed. Issues:1. Duty confirmation against import made using cancelled DEPB Scrips obtained through forged documents.2. Appellants' contention based on validity of DEPB Scrips at the time of import and reliance on legal precedents.3. Revenue's argument regarding the nullity of DEPB Scrips obtained through forgery.4. Analysis of legal precedents cited by both parties and their applicability to the case.Issue 1:The case involved an appeal against the confirmation of duty amounting to Rs. 1,40,149 against import made using DEPB Scrips that were later cancelled due to being obtained through forged bank certificates of export and realization.Issue 2:The appellants argued that at the time of import, the DEPB Scrips were valid, entitling them to duty-free import. They relied on legal precedents, including decisions by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and High Courts, emphasizing that import under a valid license cannot be subjected to customs duty.Issue 3:The Revenue contended that the DEPB Scrips were obtained through forged documents, leading to their cancellation. They cited legal principles stating that forgery remains null and void forever, and law cannot validate a forgery. Therefore, duty was rightly demanded as the DEPB Scrips were not valid.Issue 4:Upon analysis, the Tribunal found that the legal precedents cited by the appellants were not directly applicable to the present case. The Tribunal differentiated the facts of the case from the precedents, highlighting that the DEPB Scrips were obtained through falsification, not misrepresentation for license acquisition. Citing the Hon'ble Supreme Court's stance on forgery, the Tribunal concluded that any concessions on such DEPB Scrips remain null and void, upholding the duty demand.In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal, affirming the duty demand due to the DEPB Scrips' invalidity stemming from their forgery, as per the legal principles discussed in the judgment.