2004 (4) TMI 483

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....,22,428/- (Basic Customs Duty of Rs. 78,83,559.54 and Addl. Duty of Rs. 41,38,868.58) under Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962 from M/s. Gazebo Industries Ltd. on the ground that they had sold C.R Sheets imported duty free from Russia under DEEC Scheme in the local market without completing export obligations imposed under the DEEC books, proposing confiscation of C.R. Sheets seized from M/s. Gupta Udyog, Taloja and M/s. Seth Metal Processors, Taloja and from the premises of M/s. Raiyani Industries, Goa, M/s. Shrijee Sales Corporation, Pune, M/s. Balkrishna Enterprises, Pune and M/s. Yogi Corporation, Sangli under Section 111(o) and proposing penalty on M/s. Gazebo Industries Ltd., Shri Mohinder Singh, Joint Managing Director of M/s. Gazeb....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... and production record (d)     diverted and stored 338.910 MTs at the premises of M/s. Gupta Udyog and M/s. Seth Metal Processors. 4. The importers had submitted that out of the total quantity imported, 19.630 MTs of goods covered by M/E 8447 were short landed and therefore, the actual quantity imported was 2282.99 MTs. (the entire quantity covered by the remaining 2 Bs/E) to their factory at Ludhiana; that 996.637 MTs of goods imported by B/E No. 8447 were stored in godown and out of this, 635.597 MTs were sold to M/s. Western Steel Traders and 338.910 MTs were seized at Taloja and the remaining 22.130 MTS were lying in loose condition in the godown of M/s. Gupta Udyog . 5. We find that the Adjudicati....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....here is no material to substantiate such allegation and on the other hand, the bills placed on record before him show that sales took place on 15-1-96 after the exports were completed. This finding also has not been rebutted in the appeal before us. 7.  In view of the above, he held that the respondents have not violated condition (vii) of Notification No. 204/92 which provides that - "exempt materials shall not be disposed of or utilised in any manner, except for utilization in discharge of the export obligation under the said licence, before the export obligation under the said licence has been discharged in full and export proceeds realised.". To our minds, there is nothing in the language of the Notification to support the....