Appeal dismissed: Forged DEPB licences/scrips confer no duty credit; duty, interest under section 130A and statutory consequences remain

HC dismissed the appeal, holding that forged DEPB licences/scrips cannot confer credit irrespective of the appellant's lack of collusion or fraud. Because the DEPBs were found to be forged they are non est, so no entitlement to duty credit arises; liability to pay customs duty, interest under section 130A and other statutory consequences remains. The absence of involvement in issuance is immaterial to the question of entitlement to credit, though it may affect penalties for collusion or fraud; the legal challenge raised did not give rise to a question of law warranting interference.

---

---

Issues involved: Interpretation of liability for customs duty and interest u/s 130A of the Customs Act, 1962 in relation to forged DEPB scrips.

Summary:
The application was filed u/s 130A of the Customs Act, 1962, seeking relief from customs duty and interest due to the appellant not being found liable for collusion or fraud in relation to DEPB scrips. The appellant argued that since there was no collusion found, they should not be liable for duty on the forged DEPB scrips they had purchased. The court considered the availability and negotiability of DEPB scrips in the market, emphasizing that if the DEPB is forged, it is non est and no credit can be derived from it. The court highlighted that even in the absence of collusion or fraud, liability for duty and interest cannot be avoided if the DEPB is found to be forged.

The court noted that the DEPB scrips in question were found to be forged, and the absence of collusion on the part of the appellant does not affect the fact that credit cannot be derived from a forged DEPB. Drawing a comparison with a case involving a forged driving license and valid insurance policy, the court emphasized that the document itself being forged renders it non est, leading to the inability to claim credit. The court dismissed the appeal, stating that no question of law was involved in the case, and all parties were directed to act on a signed copy of the order.

---