TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2002 (4) TMI 303
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....RI/BZU searched the residence cum office premises of Shri Pradeep Bhatnagar at New Panvel on 22/23-5-2000. Certain records were seized Indian currency worth Rs. 1,22,30,000/- was also recovered from the said premises and seized under the Customs Act, 1962. 4. During the course of investigation the DRI called back the two container Nos. CRXU-2646050 and LAIU-9510710 which were exported vide vessels Hamuraabi V-084 to UAE from JNPT on 22-5-2000. Both the containers were examined by DRI on 12-6-2000 and the goods were found to be misdeclared. 5. Further, from the container No. LAIU 9510710, Indian currency amounting to Rs. 19,57,000/- in Rs. 500/- denomination was recovered. From the container No. CRXU 2646050, Indian currency amounting to Rs. 27.92 lakhs in Rs. 500/- denomination packed and concealed in one of the packages was also recovered. 6. A third export consignment exported vide container No. CRXU 2646575 through vessel Al Mirquab-V-082, dt. 9-5-2000 was also called back and examined on 29-6-2000 and goods were found to be misdeclared. Further Indian currency amounting to Rs. 19,50,000/- in Rs. 500/- and Rs. 100/- denominations packed and concealed in one of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2001-Cus., dt. 8-8-2001. The Applicant was ordered to pay the admitted duty liability of Rs. 13,52,419/- within 30 days from the receipt of the order. The goods were ordered to be released on execution of Bond equal to the value of the goods with a bank guarantee equal to 25% of the value of the goods. The Applicant paid the admitted duty liability of Rs. 13,52,419/- on 14-8-2001 and submitted the proof of the same as per Section 127C(3) of Customs Act, 1962. The Applicant also submitted the copies of Bond and Bank Guarantee executed before the Jurisdictional Commissioner. 16. The case was investigated by Commissioner (Investigation) on the basis of guidelines of investigation given by the Commission. The Commissioner (Investigation) vide Investigation report dated 10-1-2002, inter alia, submitted that the correct duty liability of 20 MT of Titanium Dioxide imported and cleared vide Bill of Entry No. 7083, dated 29-3-2000 works out to be Rs. 12,10,849/- and not Rs. 13,52,419/- as demanded in the show cause notice and accepted by the Applicant. 17. The Applicant, M/s. Pradeep Masterbatches Pvt. Ltd., Taloja, and the Co-noticee, Shri Pradeep Kumar Bhatnagar, were repres....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y totally amounting to Rs. 122.30 lakhs recovered from residence-cum-office premises of Shri Pradeep Bhatnagar. The show cause notice also proposed recovery of interest on the above Customs duty demanded and imposition of penalties on the Applicants. 21. The ld. Advocate reiterated the fact that the Applicant has fulfilled his export obligation and admitted that out of the six consignments imported against DEEC Advance Licence No. 031017072, dated 18th November, 1999, only one consignment pertaining to Bill of Entry No. 7083, dated 29th March, 2000 was diverted in local market, the duty for which was worked out to Rs. 13,52,419/- and the same has been paid by the Applicant. However, the ld. Advocate submitted that the Revenue was demanding duty for the entire consignment imported under the said DEEC licence. 22. The ld. Advocate further submitted that after the search and seizure operation by the Revenue, the Applicant has produced evidence such as drawal of amount from his Bank Account for the amount of Rs. 1,22,30,000/- recovered by the Revenue. However, despite showing evidence of the accountability of the seized Indian Currency, the amount has not been returned to t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cences in respect of which these exports were sought to be made have not been utilised for imports. The Applicant claims that he disowns Rs. 66.99 lakhs, which was seized in the container of the Applicant. 29. As regards the statement that the Applicant has submitted the input/output ratio for the last three years, the ld. Consultant submitted that they have not maintained proper Central Excise records. All these accounts have been manipulated. Therefore, the Applicant is liable to account for the remaining 21.675 MT of Titanium Dioxide and is liable to pay duty on the same. 30. The Commission has gone through the records of the case and the submissions made by the Revenue as well as the Applicant. It is seen from the records that five exports of Masterbatches "On prior export basis" were made under Licence No. 0310035809, dated 27-4-2000. Out of the above five exports, the Revenue called back three exports made under Shipping Bills 702956, dated 3-5-2000, 703297, dated 8-5-2000 and 703946, dated 15-5-2000. 31. It is noticed by the Revenue that the goods recalled in these shipping bills were misdeclared and differed in description, value and quantity. There was....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the manufacture of further goods and were lying in the work-in-progress stage. The submission is that the Revenue has overlooked this. 34. The Revenue's submission is that the Applicant did not main-tain proper Central Excise records and all accounts have been manipulated. 35. In the above connection, the Commission perused the statements recorded by the Revenue. "On being questioned about the Central Excise records in respect of imported raw material required under Customs Notification for DEEC Scheme, he stated that as they had not availed Modvat, they had only maintained Form IV Register, that they had obtained Carbon Black to replace Titanium Dioxide (which was diverted in local market) and thus the quantity in Form IV Register tallies; that Central Excise Authorities could not scrutinise the records as there were no regular entries for imported stock and the details of production of Black and White Masterbatches were not mentioned separately in RG 1 and no distinction could be made in respect of the same." In another statement recorded from Shri Pradeep Bhatnagar on 21-6-2000, he inter alia stated that even though they were manufacturing Master batches of diffe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... mind and with a view to avoid any controversy, the applicants are voluntarily and willingly ready to make further payment of Rs. 13,12,258/- being the duty leviable on 21,675 kgs. to show their bona fide and sincere desire to settle all the disputes covered by the show cause notice including release of Indian currency found from the residential premises of the Applicant." 39. In view of the above statements, the Commission orders that the Applicant should pay the duty on the un-accounted quantity of 21.675 MTs Titanium Di-Oxide amounting to Rs. 13,12,258/-. 40. The Commission further observes that at the time of filing applications, the Applicant had admitted the additional amount of duty liability payable as Rs. 13,52,419/- in respect of 20 MTs of Titanium Dioxide cleared against Bill of Entry No. 7083, dated 29-3-2000 and Advance Licence No. 0310017072, dt. 18-11-1999 as the same was diverted in the local market This duty liability of Rs. 13,52,419/- was also indicated, inter alia, against imports of Titanium Dioxide imported and cleared vide Bill of Entry No. 7083, dated 29-3-2000 in Annexure 'A' to the Show Cause Notice F. No. DRI/BZU/E/12/2000, dt. 20-11-2000 issu....