2025 (7) TMI 650

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... facts of the case are that one, M/s Sungrowth  Exports Pvt. Ltd. had exported consignments of substandard quality readymade garments under Drawback and DEPB Schemes and fraudulently availed a huge amount of Drawback and DEPB benefit. From the enquiry, it reveals that The overseas Russian Consignee did not receive the goods exported by the said firm. The said firm without exporting any garments to Russian Consignee showed export of 92400 Pc 100% Knitted Mens T-shirts of value Rs.2,97,81,675.00 to Russia in the Shipping Bills mentioned in the SCN and fraudulently availed duty drawback of Rs.36.96 lakhs in contravention of provisions laid down Section 50 (2) of the Customs Act, 1962 read with Section 11 & Section 14 of the Foreign Trade ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....gher than the 50% of the PMV of Rs.30.00 per Pc and thus violating the provision laid down M.O.F. Circular No.15/97 dated 05.06.1997. The said firm had exported 21000 pcs. of Cotton Men's T-shirt of total PMV of Rs.6,30,000/- and mis-declared the total value of the said goods as Rs.31,50,000.00 in the respective Shipping Bills to get fraudulent DEPE Licences of Rs.4,72,500.00. 2.5 The appellant, M/s Fairdeal Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. was the clearing agent of the said export. Further, inquiry revealed that the exporter has fraudulently availed the benefit of DEPB and Drawback under the Scheme. Consequently, to that effect, show-cause notice was issued to the appellants to impose penalty under Section 114 (i) and 114 (iii) of the Customs Ac....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....2005 by invoking extended period of limitation as the goods have been physically examined and allowed to be exported, in that circumstances, extended period of limitation is not invokable. 4. On the other hand, the ld.A.R. for the Revenue supported the impugned order. 5. Heard both the parties and considered the submissions. 6. In this case, we find that during the period of export, the self- assessment proceeding was not in force. Moreover, the shipping bills were filed by the appellant manually being a clearing agent and the goods after examination were allowed to be exported by the proper officer and it is the role of the exporter to avail the benefit by way of DEPB and Drawback under the Scheme, where the appellants have no role to ....