2017 (7) TMI 702

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... in the show-cause notice that the said DEPB scrips were procured by the seller of the DEPB scrip by producing incorrect documents and the said DEPB scrips were cancelled by the DGFT authorities as void ab initio. The respondent had imported goods on 13/06/2002 claiming the benefit under the said DEPB scrips. Respondent contested the show-cause notice before the adjudicating authority on various grounds and also informed the adjudicating authority that the seller of the DEPB scrips M/s. Alpha Exports had discharged the entire duty liability arising out of the scrips which were procured by them, sold to various other purchasers. The adjudicating authority did not accept the contentions raised by the respondent and confirmed the demands raise....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tter which indicates two DEPB numbers which are in question in this case and the said amount was paid by M/s. Alpha Exports in October, 2002. It is the submission that the amounts deposited by M/s. Alpha Exports is exactly the amount which has been confirmed by the adjudicating authority. 5. On careful consideration of the submissions made, we do find that the submissions made by the learned representative of the respondent has got strong force. It is noticed that M/s. Alpha Exports who had sold the DEPB scrips to the respondent herein, vide letter dt.27/11/2002, specifically states that The excess benefit of DEPB has actually accrued to us and not to the importer. We have already recovered the value of the "DEPB licence as shown in the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t of DEPB has actually accrued to him and not to the importer and finally has made good the loss of customs duty to the exchequer by paying the amount to the DRI, it would be extremely unjust and unfair to foist further penal action on the respondent. In view of the facts and circumstances of this case, it very clearly indicates that no financial liability can be put on the respondent. 8. In view of the foregoing and in the facts and circumstances of this case, we uphold the impugned order as correct and legal and hold that no interference is called for, the first appellate authority has considered these facts in his impugned order. 9. The appeal is rejected. (Order pronounced and dictated in open court) ============= Document ....