Appeal Dismissed for Selling to Fictitious Firm without License

The Tribunal dismissed the appellant's appeal against the demand of duty and penalty for selling goods to a fictitious firm with a revoked license. The appellant failed to establish valid consideration for the sale, and the buyer was non-existent without a valid Advance Release Order (ARO). The Tribunal upheld the impugned order, leading to the dismissal of the appeals filed by the appellant.

---

---

Issues: Appeal against demand of duty and penalty for sale of goods to a fictitious firm holding a revoked license by a 100% EOU.

Analysis:

The appellant, a 100% EOU, filed an appeal against the demand of duty and penalty imposed by the department for selling goods to M/s Panorama Enterprises, a fictitious firm whose license was suspended and later revoked. The appellant had sold three consignments to the buyer, who was found to be non-existent during investigation. The department demanded duty on the consignments and levied a penalty, leading to the appellant's appeal against the order-in-appeal No. 341-342/2007 dated 10/09/2007.

During the hearing, both parties were represented by their learned representatives. The Tribunal, after hearing the arguments and examining the records, noted that the appellant had sold the goods without receiving any consideration, and no effort was made to recover the amount owed. It was established that M/s Panorama Enterprises was a fictitious firm without a valid Advance Release Order (ARO). Consequently, the Tribunal agreed with the impugned order, upholding it for the reasons stated therein. As a result, the appeals filed by the appellant were dismissed.

In summary, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant against the demand of duty and penalty for selling goods to a fictitious firm with a revoked license, as the appellant had failed to establish any valid consideration for the sale and the buyer was found to be non-existent without a valid ARO.

---