TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (1) TMI 1028
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of 2014 pertains to M/s. Golden Enterprises. However, the facts are being extracted from CUSAP No. 9 of 2014. 2. CUSAP No. 9 of 2014 has been preferred by the revenue under Section 130(1) of the Customs Act, 1962 (in short "the Act") against the order, dated 24-7-2013 (Annexure A-2) passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") [2013 (298) E.L.T. 75 (Tri. - Del.)], claiming the following substantial questions of law :- a. Whether the CESTAT was justified in waiving the condition of payment of full differential duty and restricting the same to only 20%? b. Whether the CESTAT was justified in com....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....w Delhi. During the search, various incriminating documents, digital devices were recovered from the premises of Shri Mukesh Kumar Gupta. During another enquiry, the officers of the Customs Preventive Commissionerate Delhi searched the premises of M/s. S.K. Petrochem on 29-8-2013 and drawn a panchnama on the spot. As per the panchnama, no firm by the name of M/s. S.K. Petrochem existed there and further that they used to be at that premises 6-7 years ago. Thus, the imports had been made by the third parties using either a front company or a non-existing company. During investigation, four consignments imported by M/s. S.K. Petrochem, New Delhi and two by M/s. Golden Enterprises were examined at ICD, Ludhiana. In all these consignments, the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ull proposed value of the consignment. Hence, the present appeals by the revenue. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the Tribunal had erred in ordering the release of goods on payment of 20% of the differential duty and had completely waived the condition of furnishing bank guarantee equal to the full value of the seized goods which was taken at US $ 940 PMT. According to the learned counsel, the respondent was a non-existent company and was carrying on business at the behest of M/s. Om Udyog and to safeguard the interest of the revenue, the order of the Tribunal is liable to be set aside. Support was drawn from following averments in the present appeal : - "2.(iii) That acting on the above intelligenc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t, clearance etc. was looked after by Shri Jeevan Jain only; that he had not fixed any remuneration from Shri Jeevan Jain; however he used to receive Rs. 15,000/- to Rs. 20,000/- for allowing import in the name of his firm. This statement was subsequently retracted by Shri Mukesh Kumar Gupta on 21-2-2013, yet its evidentiary value cannot be denied as the retraction was an afterthought based clearly on legal advice which was countered by DRI on 1-3-2013. (viii) That further, statement of Shri Jeevan Jain had been recorded on 15-4-2013 wherein he had stated that he used to sell the goods on high sea sales basis to M/s. S.K. Petrochem and Shri Mukesh Kumar Gupta used to sign the high sea sales documents on behalf of M/s. S.K. Pet....