2016 (12) TMI 766

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....taining 330 ctns. Of POY weighing 7920 kgs and total valued at Rs. 4,98,960/- was intercepted at M/s. Kadri Texturisers, Village Karanj, Mandvi, Surat and balance 5 trucks containing 1650 ctns of POY weighing 39600 kgs and valued at Rs. 24,94,800/- were intercepted at appellants group company M/s. Gandhi Capital Pvt Ltd, KIM, Dist Surat. On being found that these goods were imported under EOU scheme and had been diverted without being in-bonded, the goods were seized along with trucks under reasonable belief that the goods were liable to confiscation under the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962. After detailed investigation a show cause notice was issued wherein seized goods were proposed to be confiscated, foregone duty was demanded and ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he persons found to have done are omitted to do the act which has rendered the goods liable for confiscation under Section 111(j) & (o) of the Customs Act, 1962, under provisions of Section 112(a) of the said Act: (I) Shri Alpesh Arvindbhai Gandhi - Rs. NIL (ii) M/s. Gandhi Fibers, Daman Rs. 8,00,000/- (Rupees Eight lakhs only) (No separate penalty against the proprietor is imposed because it is a sole proprietorship firm) (iii) Shri Naresh Rarneshwardas Goyal - Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) (iv) Shri Kamlesh Ramniranjan Lohia - Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty thousand only) 5) A penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Iakh only) is imposed on Shri Alfajbhai Arifbhai Motiwala of M/s. Kadri Texturisers, Surat under Section 112....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....llant and used in the manufacture of final product which was exported from their 100% EOU, therefore compliance of the requirement of 100% EOU provision was made and export obligation was fulfilled, for this reason also the duty cannot be demanded. However Ld. Commissioner on this vital fact has not given any findings. He placed reliance on the following judgments: Consumption of confiscated imported goods in manufacture and subsequent export of manufactured goods undisputed * Sarla Polyester Ltd. v. Commissioner - 2009 (235) E.L.T. 687 (Tribunal) * Comn-ff. Of Cus. & C.Ex. vs. J.S. Gupta & Sons - 2015 (318) ELT 63 (All.) Heavy reliance placed on incriminating statement of Mr. Motiwala without providing opportunity to cross examine hi....