TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (2) TMI 540
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Ltd., Ludhiana and Sh. Satbir Singh s/o Sh. Lashkar Singh, 13, Aman Nagar, Jalandhar have floated this firm in the name of Sh.Satbir Singh, who was working as an assistant of Sh.Pavitar Singh, CA on monthly salary of Rs. 6000/-. 3. The business and residential premises of S/Sh.Gurkirpal Singh, Ashok Kumar, partner of M/s ATM International, Jalandhar and Sh.Pavitar Singh, CA were raided on 13/14.12.2000 by the officers of Anti-Smuggling Wing of Customs Commissionerate, Amritsar. As a result of search in the business premises of Sh.Pavitar Singh, CA files containing DEPB applications submitted to the office of Joint Director General of Foreign Trade, Ludhiana were recovered as also rubber stamps of M/s Megna Impex, Jalandhar in addition to several other incriminating records and other rubber stamps. 4. During the investigation export documents like Shipping Bills / Invoices/Packing Lists filed by the exporter and appended as Annexure-A were resumed from CFS(OWPL), Ludhiana and from the office of the Joint Director General of Foreign Trade, Green Field, Ludhiana. The description of export goods on these shipping bills and related invoices and packing list was mentioned as " Tim....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd substituting the same. All these activities of fraudulent availment of excess DEPB benefit he came to know only at the time of investigation. Therefore, as the fraudulent document has not been signed by the appellant, therefore, he cannot be penalized in the proceedings. At the most disciplinary action would have been taken against the appellant by the Department in the departmental proceedings which has not been done by the Department as the appellant has already been by the retired. Therefore, he prayed that appellant be exonerated from the proceedings. 8. On the other hand, Ld. AR drew my attention to the various statements of the appellants and submits that after examining veracity of the statements made by the investigating team the Adjudicating authority has correctly imposed penalty on all the appellants. Heard the parties. Considered the submission. 9. In the case of Shri Pavitar Singh matter came up before this Tribunal and after examining all the statements of the persons recorded during the course of investigation and action taken by CBI this Tribunal have arrived at the following conclusion: "13. After appreciating the submissions made by both the sides, we find ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion. The DEPB obtained by M/s. Megna Impex were being used/sold by Shri Ashok Kumar and Shri Gurkirpal Singh; that the blank cheques were being issued by him and were being given to Shri Ashok Kumar; that he was putting his signatures on all export related documents at the instance of Shri Ashok Kumar. Similarly, in his statement recorded on 18.4.2001, Shri Satbir Singh deposed that he had given 3 to 4 blank cheque books duly signed by him to Shri Ashok Kumar and one blank cheque book and some loose cheques to Shri. Gurkirpal Singh. There is no mention of the name of Shri Pavitar Singh in the said statement of Shri Satbir Singh except to the fact that he was an employee of Shri Pavitar Singh and Shri Pavitar Singh was engaged In the activity of getting I.E Code and export related documents. 16. The question which arises is that whether the fact that the proprietor of M/s. Megna Impex was found to be an employee of Shri Pavitar Singh, who was handling the documentary work of M/s, Megna Impex, by itself can be held to be sufficient factor to uphold the allegation of aiding and abeting against the appellant. It has come out clearly in the statement of Shri Satbir Singh that it was S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n instructions of Shri Ashok Kumar @ Lucky and Shri Gurkirpai Singh but no criminal mensrea was substantiated against him during investigation." The above finding of CBI duly support the appellant's stand that he was working only in his professional capacity as Chartered Accountant and was not a party to the fraudulent activities of export. The sanction order passed by the Commissioner on 19.12.03, providing sanction of prosecution, in the said fraudulent activities, does not include the appellant's name. We also find support, for the conclusion arrived at by us in the preceding progress, from the assessment order passed by Income Tax authorities in the case of Shri Satbir Singh, Manager of M/s. Megna Impex. As per the said assessment order it stands held as under:- "...it is clearly established that the real beneficiaries of the business were Shri Ashok Kumar and Gurkirpai Sinigh and Shri Satbir Singh, the asesseee was only used as weapon for deposits of money in the bank accounts, which was withdrawn by these two persons for their own selfish motive and Shri Satbir Singh was a man of no means, Further, this fact is also corroborated by the enquiries, when Shri Ashok K....