TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (8) TMI 634
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rporation is a merchant exporter, who has filed five shipping bills dated 17-7-2004 at Nhava Sheva port for export of beta napthol declaring a value of $89 per kg FOB to Australia. The goods were duly exported by accepting the declared value and description. However, on the basis of certain intelligence received some consignments of two other firms M/s. Kuba Tex and Harman Plasto Chem of Beta Napthol were detained and representative samples were drawn from these sample. The test reports of the Dy. Chief Chemist revealed that the items under exports of these two concerns were not beta napthol but sodium chloride mixed with some pigments. Investigation further revealed that similar consignments were exported by others including AJ Corporation....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ls of the buyers and export related documents and ARE-1 were given by him. Investigation further revealed that Balaji Dye Chemicals was a bogus firm created by Rajendra Gupta and the proprietor of the said firm was one Sujit Parmar, who was a casual labourer hired by Shri Gupta. 3. Statements of the proprietor of Mahendra Shipping Agency, Rajesh Mehta and its employees were recorded wherein Mehta denied of having submitted shipping bills of A.J. Corporation for clearance purpose. One Harichand P. Kadam employee of Mahendra Shipping Agency who had got the shipping bill of two firm Kuba Tex and Harman Plasto assessed and which were later on found to have misdeclared cleared their product, in his statement denied having ever dealt with....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... these three applicants. These exported goods could not be examined as they were already exported, nor any sample was drawn at the time of export for the purpose of testing. The goods were considered to be the same as exported by Kuba Tex and Harman Plasto Chem because the supplier of the goods was one and the same, M/s. Balaji Dye Chemicals, a bogus firm created by Gupta. The show cause notice was adjudicated by the Commissioner who ordered confiscation of goods with an option to redeem the same on payment of a redemption fine of Rs. 50 lakhs, disallowed the DEPB claim of Rs. 24,29,700/- to A.J. Corporation and imposed a penalty of Rs. 25 lakhs on A.J. Corporation and Mahendra Shipping Agency each and Rs. 10 lakh on Jatin Sotta. The presen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....endra Shipping Agency as well as its employees have always denied of ever having dealt with consignment of A.J. Corporation and they had earlier brought to the notice of the custom house that their name is being misused by some other persons and further there is no finding in the order that Mahendra Shipping Agency had the knowledge that the goods were misdescribed and over invoiced. In the absence of the same, penalty cannot be imposed. 8. As regards Jatin Sotta, it was submitted that the only allegation against him is that he has processed the consignment of A.J. Corporation for export through customs for which he was paid a sum of Rs. 1000/- per document but there is no finding in the order that he had the knowledge that the docu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ompliance on 20-10-2008. On such compliance being made, there shall be waiver of pre-deposit of the balance amount of penalty and recovery thereof stayed till the disposal of appeal. Failure to comply shall result in dismissal of appeal without further notice. 11. As regards penalty on Mahendra Shipping Agency, we find that the penalty has been imposed only by holding that he has handled the shipping bills of A.J. Corporation and also of the other two exporters, Kuba Tex and Harman Plasto Chem. No evidence has been brought by the revenue to show that the shipping bills were indeed signed by the proprietor or employee of Mahendra Shipping Agency when they have expressly denied of doing so. A mere fact that the shipping bills of the o....