TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (12) TMI 419
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t. Ltd., Shri Rajesh Maikhuri and Shri Rakesh Kumar, respectively. The appellant Company M/s. R.U. Import-Export Pvt. Ltd., is a CHA company having CHA licence granted under the CHA Licensing Regulations, 2004. Shri Rajesh Maikhuri is the Managing Director of aforesaid CHA company and Shri Rakesh Kumar is an employee holding G-card of the CHA company. The facts leading to these appeals, are in brief, as under: 1.1 Three shipping bills were filed by M/s. Rupsy Enterprises on 13-1-2006 for export of consignments declared to be consisting of "leather goods, leather shoe uppers". Each of these shipping bills covered 21 packages declared to be containing 3150 pieces of leather shoe uppers with FOB value of Rs. 24,55,601/- each. These exports ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat one Shri S. Roy had prepared the Annexure A, signed the shipping bill, that one Shri Pawan Kumar had given the invoice to Shri. S. Roy to file the shipping bills; and that Shri Pawan Kumar and Shri S. Roy had brought the goods to the Customs Area. Shri Pawan Kumar was only a forwarding agent and he in his statement dated 17-4- 2006 stated that he was proprietor of firm M/s. Aayush Enterprises engaged in the business of forwarding; that it deal with exports and CHAs for arranging the export shipments that Shri Amarjeet Singh was the proprietor of M/s. Rupsy Enterprises; that from M/s. Rupsy Enterprises he got the export job, for export of three consignments each of 21 packages declared to be of leather shoe uppers; that he handed over th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Heard both sides. 2.1 Shri S.S. Arora, Advocate, the learned Counsel for the appellants pleaded that it is Shri Pawan Kumar and Shri S. Roy who had brought the impugned consignment to the Customs House; that Shri S. Roy had forged the signature of the employee of CHA company on the shipping bills; that initial examination of the goods had been conducted in the presence of Shri S. Roy and Shri Pawan Kumar; that as soon they came to know that it is to be examined 100% they ran away with the documents that the appellants in these proceedings had nothing to do with this illicit export; that it is only under the Custom's pressure that they obtained the shipping documents from Shri S Roy; that only at the time of 100% examination, the appellan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t, that if the appellant had nothing to do with the illicit export and had not filed the shipping bills, on which his signature has been forged, there is no explanation as to how the export documents came into their possession; that Shri Rajesh Maikhuri in his statement dated 24-8-06 has admitted that he knew Shri S. Roy for the past two years and that on 20-1-06, the export documents were given to him by Shri S. Roy; that this shows that this export had taken place with the knowledge of the appellants and appellants were aware of forging of their signatures and that only in these circumstances that the Commissioner has imposed penalty on them. Shri Srivastava emphasised that there is strong circumstantial evidence against the appellants an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ven the export documents to Shri S. Roy for filing the ship ping bill and it is Shri Pawan Kumar and Shri S. Roy who had brought the goods to the customs area. If Shri Rajesh Maikhuri had nothing to do with these consignments and the documents has been filed by mentioning the name of his company as CHA, there is no explanation as to how he is aware of these facts. It is also seen that Shri Rakesh Kumar, an employee of CHA company in his statement dated 24-1-2006 has stated that he knew Shri S. Roy for the past two years and that he was also aware that these shipping bills in the name of his CHA company has been filed by Shri S. Roy and Shri Pawan Kumar on 13-1-20O When it is clear that on the shipping bills, the signatures of Shri Rakesh Ku....