TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (8) TMI 281
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n addition, penalties stand imposed to the extent of Rs. 8 lakhs each on other two appellants who are the directors of M/s. Sunstar Impex. 2. As per the facts on record, M/s. Sunstar Impex is a trading unit located in Kandla SEZ. They imported polyester fabric, polyester woven dyed fabric, under Bills of Entry dated 24-1-2001 without payment of duty in terms of Notification No. 137/2000-Cus., dated 19-1-2000. Based upon the intelligence that the goods so imported by them were being sold in the open market under the guise of clearances supposedly made to another 100% EOU, Revenue started conducting investigations. 3. Inasmuch as the said appellants had shown the clearances to M/s. D.D. Trading Co. (DDTC for short), another 100% EOU loc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e of further investigations, statement of Shri Bhagwandas Harikishan Agarwal was recorded on 14-5-2002, wherein he, inter alia, admitted that he along with his son Shri Ajay Agarwal traded the goods in the name of DDTC; that re-warehousing certificate in the name of DDTC were arranged by Shri Ajay Agarwal and Shri Deepak Gupta; that the goods were never sent to DDTC but only document formalities were completed; that the goods were disposed off by the original importer in the market and they were only receiving their commission. 6. Statement of Shri Ajay Agarwal was recorded on 15-7-2002 admitting that no goods cleared by M/s. Sunstar Impex were ever received by DDTC and only paper transactions took place; that for helping the appellants ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....them by way of issuance of show cause notice, dated 13-1-04, which stands culminated into the impugned order passed by the Commissioner. 10. After hearing both sides, we find that the fact of various re-warehousing certificates produced by M/s. Sunstar Impex do not stand agitated or rebutted by the appellant. Their entire arguments are only to the effect that inasmuch as they have cleared the goods to DDTC, a 100% EOU, duty liability shall stand shifted to DDTC and cannot be confirmed against them. They relied upon the Tribunal's decision in the case of M/s. Santogen Textile Mill Ltd. v. Commissioner - 2007 (214) E.L.T. 386 (T), followed by Tribunal in the case of Vikram Enterprises v. Commissioner of Customs, Kandla, 2008 (226) E.L.T. 4....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e not having valid permit for going to Uttar Pradesh. It was the duty of M/s. Sunstar Impex to see that the goods reached DDTC and proper re-warehousing certificates are obtained by them. The goods cleared by the trading unit in SEZ enjoys the exemption granted in terms of Notification No. 137/00-Cus., if such clearances are to another 100% EOU. Inasmuch as in the present case, the evidences available on record in the form of statement of directors of M/s. Sunstar Impex, transporters, brokers and proprietor of DDTC as also financial transactions, having established beyond doubt that the goods were never received by DDTC, but in fact, DDTC was established with an ulterior motive to show them as recipient of the goods and the entire exercise ....