2011 (8) TMI 639

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri Abhay Kolte, advocate for Appellants Shri V.K.Agarwal, JCDR for Respondent Per : Ashok Jindal The appellants are manufacturers of sugar. During the course of investigation, it was found that one M/s. Standard Investments have executed a General B-1 Bond with Dy.Commissioner  (Bond) Central Excise, Mumbai.1 for removal of sugar without payment of central excise duty for export ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nbsp; 2. As the merchant exporter could not export the sugar within the specified time, investigations were started and it was found that the said goods were diverted to DTA instead of exporting the same. Therefore, a show-cause notice was issued to the appellants for imposition of penalty as well as to the merchant exporter for demanding duty and other actions under Central Excise Act. During ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the Maritime Commissioner for the purpose of exporting the sugar, therefore, there was no intention of the appellants to contravene the provisions of central excise law. Moreover, if at all, there is a contravention of central excise provisions, it is done only by the merchant exporter for which the appellants cannot be liable to penalize. In support of this contention, he relied upon the decisio....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sugar into DTA which was cleared by them without payment of duty against CT.1 certificate.  Therefore, the impugned order is to be upheld. 5. We have heard both sides and found that in this case  the appellants have cleared the sugar without payment of duty after producing CT.1 certificate issued by the Maritime Commissioner. It was the duty of the Maritime Commissioner while issuing ....