TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (4) TMI 279
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... was grossly over invoiced. It was found that though the said PVC soles were purchased from Agra at Rs. 6.25 per pair, they were misdeclared and value as shown in the invoices at Rs. 380 per pair. It was all done fraudulently to avail DEPB credit to the tune of Rs. 24 ,12,114 /-. When the aforesaid facts came to the notice of the appellant/Custom Authorities, a show cause notice dated 10.3.2000 was issued under Section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962, for confiscation of the aforesaid goods under Section 113(d) of the Customs Act, 1962. Insofar as these three respondents are concerned, they were also roped in with the allegations that they had colluded with M/s. Yash Export in mentioning the inflicted figure in the invoices. Order-in-Original....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Tribunal that it was not a case where the goods could not be confiscated under Sec.113 (d) of the Act is erroneous, and law in this behalf is well settled by the judgment of this Court in Om Prakash Bhatia vs. Commissioner of Customs, Delhi (2003) 6 SCC 161. He also brought to our notice the judgment of the CESTAT itself which is rendered in the appeal that was filed by the exporter in the instant case challenging the Order-in-Original on the ground that there could not have been confiscation under clause (d) of Section 113 of the Customs Act and the said appeal was dismissed by the Tribunal following the aforesaid judgment in the case of Om Prakash Bhatia and the judgment Yash Exports Inc. vs. Commissioner of Customs, Lucknow reported....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sale or offer for sale. 19. To the same effect, Rule 11 of the Foreign Trade (Development and Regulation) Rules, 1993 provides. This Rule is to be read along with Section 11(1) of the Foreign Trade (Development & Regulation) Act, 1992, which inter alia provides that no export or import shall be made by any person except in accordance with the provisions of this act, the rules and the orders made thereunder and the export and import policy for the time being in force. Rule 11 reads thus :- - "11. Declaration as to value and quality of imported goods .- -On the importation into, or exportation out of, any customs ports of any goods, whether liable to duty or not, the owner of such goods shall in the bill of entry or the shipping bill or an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....acts of this case penalties were rightly imposed by the Commissioner . Though this aspect is not considered by the Tribunal it may not be necessary to refer the case back to the Tribunal for this particular purpose. Counsel on both sides agreed that the order of the Commissioner can be gone into to determine this aspect. Coming to the alleged role of respondent no.1 Mr. G.P.Jaiswal , we find that the Commissioner has imposed the order of payment of penalty of Rs. 25,000 /- upon him only on the ground that the goods were cleared for export by his son Alok Jaiswal . That can hardly be the ground to fasten the liability or attribute abetment on the part of respondent no.1 . Likewise, insofar as respondent no.2 Mr. Rakesh Mishra is concerned, ....