2018 (12) TMI 734

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....is no privity of contract between department of Revenue and the Transferee of License to claim any benefit of estoppels; Action of Customs is without prejudice to action of DGFT, and not department on them when it has been clearly held so by Hon'ble S.C. in case of Sheshank Ltd. and followed by other High Courts ? (ii) Whether the CESTAT failed to appreciate that the assessee cannot rely provisions of the Sales of Goods Act to frustrate the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962, in as much when the customs Act, which is a specific Act, specifies person from whom duty to be recovered, which is a general Act, ignoring the settled provisions of Special Act / statute which will prevail over the General Act / statute? (iii) Whether the CESTA....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....that without making actual export, on the strength of fraudulently created documents such DEPB licenses were obtained. On the strength of such DEPB scrip, the assessee had cleared imported goods. A showcause notice, therefore, came to be issued against the assessee and others on 30th July, 2002 to showcause why dues should not be recovered, goods should not be confiscated and penalty should not be imposed. After adjudication authority held against the assessee, the issue reached to the Tribunal. The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee primarily on the ground that the assessee being a bona fide purchaser without notice and not being party to the fraud, no recoveries can be made from the assessee. The Tribunal relied on the decision o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ent admittedly is not a party to the fraud. There are categorical finding that it had purchased DEPB from the open market in the bona fide belief of its being genuine. The assesee-respondent had paid full price and accordingly had availed the benefit. 10. It is also worth noticing that the assessee-respondent was issued a show-cause notice dated 10.6.2002 (P2) before cancelling the DEPB, which was obtained by M/s. Parker Industries, however, we are of the view that notice under Section 28 of the Customs Act could not be issued to the assessee-respondent because a period of six months stipulated by Section 28 of the Customs Act stood already expired and the right of the parties had been crystalised, the imports having been affected on 15-11....