TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (7) TMI 415
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....#8195;The facts of the case are that on 27-10-2008, a shipping bill was filed. While scrutinizing the shipping bill, it was noticed that invoice of the document showed the size of the fabric declared as 6.3 meters x 1.12 meters. Assistant Commissioner, Exp./Shed examined the above said shipping bill along with the other shipping bills of the same presented for clearances at the export shed. In the course of examination, it was noticed that the goods were actually embroidered Sarees which were hemmed and ready to use. The exporter has given the description of goods as fabric and declared the goods as dyed fabric made from 100% polyester filament yarn with embroidery and claimed the higher rate of 8.2% DEPB. In fact, these goods should have b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sioner of Customs, Mumbai in 2003 (157) E.L.T. 662 (Tri.-Mumbai) by the appellants is well founded to set aside the confiscation orders arrived at in this case. No confiscation penalty could be arrived at on overvaluation for claiming higher DEPB relying on the decision of Suresh Jhunjhunwala v. Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs., Hyderabad, 2005 (183) E.L.T. 60 (Tri-Mumbai). 5. The jurisdiction of Customs Authority to sit over the decision in the , case of DEPB is not upheld in the case of Suresh Enterprises, 2005 (179) E.L.T. 466. We also rely on the decision in the case of Ramayan Impex v. Commissioner of Customs (exports) Nhava Sheva, 2005 (189) E.L.T. 446 (Tri.-Mumbai) to set aside the confiscation and the penalty arrived....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....wherein this Tribunal has observed as under :- "5. After giving careful consideration to the submissions, we have not found any valid grounds in these appeals against the decision of the Commissioner. In the absence of evidence of any coercion having been exerted by departmental officers on the appellants to produce adverse evidence in the form of invoice stating higher market value for the export goods, it has to be held that the invoice showing a value of Rs. 20 lakhs for 10 lakhs pieces of pens was produced by the appellant voluntarily in support of their own admission of overvaluation of the goods. In their statements, the appellants categorically admitted the offence of overvaluation with intent to acquire undue DEPB benefit. Th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng the case to the Tribunal for reconsidering the question whether the party had indulged in overvaluation of export goods for claiming higher DEPB benefit. Pursuant to the remand, this Tribunal vide Suresh Jhunjhunwala v. Commissioner of Customs, Hyderabad - 2007 (220) E.L.T. 842 (Tri.-Mumbai) found that the party had overvalued the goods for undue DEPB benefit. In the case of Mercantile India (supra) also, it was found that the quantity and value of export goods were misdeclared with intent to avail DEPB credit and accordingly confiscation was upheld. In our view, the appellant's case is worse inasmuch as they consistently confessed to having overvalued the goods for claiming undue DEPB benefit and even produced documentary evidence of Pr....