2013 (11) TMI 1039
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....scrip of Rs. 95,99,084/- was undertaken to be surrendered to the DGFT for cancellation. Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CC(E.P.) VS. Jupitor Exports -2007 (213) ELT 641 (Bom) held that DEPB value cannot be recovered from transferor exporter when those scrip were not invalid on the date of issuance thereof following the Apex Court judgement in the case of Sampat Raj Duggal -1992 (58) ELT 163 (S.C.) and East India Commercial Co. Ltd. -1983 (13) ELT 1342 (S.C.). Answering the question mentioned in Para 23 of the judgement Hon'ble High Court upheld Tribunal's order. Accordingly, it is open to the department to proceed against the person who had obtained a license by forgery or wilful mis-declaration, in accordance with law. 2. Furt....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion against the post export consignments without any evidence to the contrary. 5. It was also argued that show cause notice has been issued by the Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) who was not a proper officer under law for issuance of the same following the Apex Court judgement in the case of Sayed Ali. Even the amendment made to section 28(11) of the Customs Act, 1962 no way has affected the applicability of law laid down by Apex Court in the case of C.C. vs. Sayed Ali, reported in 2011 (265) ELT 0017 (S.C.). 6. On facts, it was submitted that both at the anti-mortem and post-mortem stages, the animals were certified to be proper for slaughter by the veterinary doctor. There was allegation that blank certificates of such doctor and b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ort consignments nor specific shipping bills were put to test by customs to know the manner of occurrence of the transaction from the origin of goods till termination at the export stage. None of the evidence have been properly appraised nor evaluated while the evidence of the driver, transporters, supervisor, doctor and many other persons have been recorded under section 108 of Customs Act, 1962. Once the adjudication has not brought out clearly what was the issue before the authority for decision on the basis of facts and the relevant evidence on the touch stone of law applicable. Guidelines have been issued by Apex Court in the case of Jt. Commr. of Income Tax, Surat vs. Saheli Leasing & Industries Ltd., reported in 2010 (253) ELT 705 (S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d not be rhetoric and should not reflect a contrived effort on the part of the author. (f) After arguments are concluded, an endeavour should be made to pronounce the judgment at the earliest and in any case not beyond a period of three months. Keeping it pending for long time, sends a wrong signal to the litigants and the society. (g) It should be avoided to give instances, which are likely to cause public agitation or to a particular society. Nothing should be reflected in the same which may hurt the feelings or emotions of any individual or society. 10. For improper manner of completion of adjudication it is not possible to pass an interim order. Therefore, in all fairness adjudication has to go back to the learned Adjudicating Author....