2006 (6) TMI 372

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....d further directed that if such pre-deposit is made, the pre-deposit of penalties would be waived. The applicants had challenged the order before the Hon'ble High Court in its writ jurisdiction and by order dated 2-9-2005 the High Court modified the order of the Tribunal by directing that the applicant shall deposit 50% of the duty determined against them and furnish bank guarantee for the balance duty amount. It is also directed that the deposit as also the bank guarantees shall be made and furnished within two months from the date of the said order. It appears that thereafter the applicants made an application before the Hon'ble High Court for modification of that order and the Hon'ble High Court by its order dated 21-4-2006, in view of t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....wilful misstatement or suppression of fact with an intent to evade payment of duty on the part of the importers and, therefore, the demands which were made by invoking the extended period were barred by limitation. The learned Counsel contended that there was no evidence on the basis of which the knowledge that the advance licences were forged should be attributed to any of these applicants who had imported the goods, namely, brass and copper scrap. He submitted that those advance licences were forged in the names of the applicants. The applicants, who are sole proprietary concerns, were given these licences through their consignment agent at whose behest these applicants made payments by demand drafts to "UNO Enterprises", which also admit....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... account of the importer. The Tribunal found that there was no evidence to substantiate the allegation and the statements of the persons concerned did not disclose that they were agents of the importers. This is why the Tribunal found that there was no wilful misstatement or suppression of fact with intent to evade payment of duty on the part of the importers. It will be noticed that the decision of the Tribunal was based on a finding of fact that wilful misstatement with intent to evade payment of duty was not proved in that case. 4. In the present case the matter on record shows without any dispute that all the advance licences on the basis of which these applicants imported the goods were forged and that these licences were obtai....