TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (1) TMI 1129
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., the Ld. Commissioner apart from directing confiscation of export goods (Neck Tie) covered under 32 Shipping Bills, also ordered re-determination of the assessable value thereof and rejected the drawback claim on the said goods attempted to be exported under the said 32 Shipping Bills. He has also ordered the rejection of the draw-back claim in respect of past shipment of the said product (33 in numbers). He has also imposed penalties under section 114(i) and 114 (ii) as well as under section 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962 on various persons involved including the present appellant. The rejection of the drawback claim has been so directed on account of gross over-valuation of the export goods for the purpose of claiming unintended and high....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... M/s. Singh Trading Co. (b) Photographs of Surjeet Vains proprietor of M/s. Singh Trading Co. (c) Various papers where signature of Surjeet Vains appears. (d) An envelope addressed to Anupam Mondal sent by Jassi. During the search, no other documents or thing were retrieved from the residence of appellant. 3. A show cause notice dated 10.11.2010 was issued to five persons including the appellant as well as Shri Debasis Mukherjee. The impugned show cause notice came to be concluded vide Order-in- Original referred supra. It is the claim of the department that acting on intelligence concerning unscrupulous exports of goods declared as "Neck Tie" under duty drawback scheme with claim of inflated and undue drawb....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hile payments to him were made through deposit in his account (either personal or company account), he would also get some money by withdrawing cash from the ATM for which Jassi had provided to him his (Jassi's) ATM Card. This ATM Card was in the name of Asutosh Birla. During the search of the office premises of the CHA, the department recovered certain incriminating documents by way of the following:- i) blank soft copies of invoice & packing list of M/s. Cosmos Impex, for export of silk ties, found in the office computer, print outs of which were taken, which were then authenticated by Shri Mukherjee; ii) several rubber stamps of various firms including M/s. Cosmos Impex, M/s. Singh Trading Co., M/s. S.K.Acharya & M/s. O....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e said firm - Ajay Madan. None of the aforesaid are presently in appeal before us, hence, their role is discussed only to the extent of prefacing the factual matrix of the case. 6. In so far as the appellant, Anupam Mondal is concerned, the only charge against him is abetting Shri Ajay Madan alias Jassi alias Ashutosh Birla, the real exporter of this case, by creating fake identity for him, by helping him open a bank account using the said fake identity, by receiving money from him in his bank account and handing it over to Debasis Mukhejee for the purpose of the subject exports of neckties. The appellant has therefore been subjected to penalty under section 114/ and 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962. 7. The Noticee at Sl.No.(v) of SCN -....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... dated 30.06.2010, which had been subsequently retracted. While the appellant may have denied all the charges made in the notice, it is an undisputed fact that incriminating documents were seized from his residence. Further, though the appellant may hold that receiving money from Jassi and handing over the same to Debasis Mukherjee was not an offence under the purview of Customs Act, 1962, it is a fact that the appellant failed to justiciably explain reasons thereof, without attributing the same to the present offence. Thus for abetting the contraventions under the provisions of the Customs Act, penalties have been imposed upon the appellant the Section 114 and / 114AA by the authorities below. 9. We find from the statement of Anupam Mon....