2017 (12) TMI 563

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....one, for appellant Shri Ahibaran, Addl. Commr (AR), for respondent ORDER Per: D.N. Panda None present for the appellants. 2. Revenue's submission is that appellant Macnair Exports Pvt. Ltd. (MEPL) had imported dyes, chemicals and fittings required for tanning and manufacturing leather goods. Such goods were imported under DEEC Scheme but were sold in the domestic market. Appellant f....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e supporting manufacturer. When such plea failed to be evidenced, demand of Rs. 3,02,87,112/- arose. Learned adjudicating authority in para 33 of his order held as under:- "33. It is seen that in this case, the omission on the part of M/s MEPL is not bonafide. It is not a case of interpretation of policy provisions; but an act which they knew they were doing was wrong and were fully aware that ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... (c) I also impose the following penaltieis under Section 112(a) & (b) of the Customs Act, 1962. (i) A sum of Rs. 50,00,000/- (Rupees fifty lakhs only) on MEPL. (ii) A sum of Rs. 25,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs only) on Shri H.R.Bhatt, Director of MEPL (iii) A sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- (Rupees ten lakhs only) on Shri Firz B. Hajiyani. 3. Appellant no where broug....