2024 (10) TMI 396

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lant has given brief background of the case and stated that Appellant submitted 10 GR Form each in the name of two firms which were M/s. Universal Traders and M/s. Zen Series but subsequently exported the goods only against 6 GR Forms in the name of M/s. Universal Traders and 5 GR Form in the name of Zen Series. He did not export the garments against remaining GR. As against export pursuant to the six GR in the name of M/s. Universal Traders and five in the name of Zen Series, the Appellant could not realize the export proceeds against one GR of M/s. Zen Series and six GR of M/s. Universal Traders. 3. The Appellant did not make exports against all the GR issued in the name of the firm yet notice was issued making him responsible for alle....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s in the case of M/s. Universal Traders till 06.08.2000 however no extension was granted in reference to the other firm and even for M/s. Universal Traders beyond 06.08.2000. The prayer was accordingly made to cause interference of the impugned order. 6. The Learned Counsel for the Appellant did not raise any other issue for challenge to the impugned order other than referred to above. 7. The contest to the Appeal was made by the Learned Counsel for the Respondent. It is submitted that the reasoned order has been passed by the Competent Authority for imposition of penalty finding Contravention of Section 18(2) of FERA. The extensive argument was made by the Learned Counsel for the Respondent on the factual issue raised by the Appellan....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....lso found that Custom Department has confirmed 10 GR each issued in the name of two firms to be genuine. It was the undertaking of the firm that they would realize the exports proceeds within the stipulated period. In the light of the aforesaid, very basis to make out a case for export only against 06 GR in the case of M/s. Universal Trader and 05 by Zen Series would not stand. It is more so when the Appellant was given opportunity by this Tribunal to find out whether the GR issued by the Customs Department leaving 06 GR for M/s. Universal Traders and 05 GR for Zen Series, whether remaining were withdrawn from the Customs Department and from the bonded area. The opportunity for it was given on 08.04.2024 but the Appellant failed to produce ....