TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (1) TMI 1682
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lf in illegal supply of Red Sanders and making arrangements for fraudulent exports and actively associated himself in an organized manner in smuggling of Red Sanders to Mr. Lin of China, with the help of other syndicate members i.e, Shri Anil Gadodia, Shri Mayur Ranjan, Shri Yodying, Shri Daljeet, Shri Kamal Negi and Shri Vinod Saini. Thus, for the said acts of omissions and commissions on his part, Shri Saurabh Chopra @Saurav appears to have rendered himself liable to penal action under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962. 35. Now, therefore Shri Anil Gadodia S/o Late. Shri Shyam Sunder Gadodia, resident of 882-A, Kedar Building Ghanta Ghar, Old Subzi Mandi, Delhi; Shri Mayur Ranjan resident of N.P. 157D, Near Gopal Mandir, Pitampura, New Delhi; Mr. Yodying resident of F-76, 3(tm) Floor, Mansarovar Garden, New Delhi; Shri Daljeet resident of 94, Upper Ground Floor, Abchal Nagar, Nilothi Ext., Chander Vihar, Delhi; Shri Saurav Chopra resident of WZ-276-C, 2nd Floor, Inderpuri, New Delhi, Shri Kamal Negi resident of B-12/24, Kaushik Enclave, Burari, New Delhi-110084 and Shri Vinod Saini resident of A 5/86, Rajbeer Colony, Delhi-g6 or any other person/persons claiming the o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ce of 11.411 MT i.e. total of serial No. 1,2, 9 and 12 of panhnama dated 28.09.2013/ 01.08.2014 drawn at the godown of Shri Anil Gadodia, found to be red sanders (as per report dated 04.02.2015 of Office of the Scientist-D, Central National Herbarium, Botanical Garden, Howrah in respect of four samples) and 10.660 MT red sanders which was in net balance stock of Sh. Anil gadodia) seized from the godown of Shri Anil Gadodia situated at A32, Wazirpur Industrial Area, Opposite J.D. Dharam Kanta, Delhi-52 under panchnama dated 28. 09.2013 under Section 113 of the Customs Act, 1962 for violation of Section 11 of the Customs Act, 1962 read with appendix ll of CITES. I refrain from confiscation of rest of 20.223 MT goods found to be Sandalwood instead of red sanders (as per report dated 28.12.2016 of Institute of Wood Science & Technology, Bangalore in respect of 13 samples) and 10.660 MT red sanders which was shown in stock of Sh. Anil gadodia (Total 20.223 MT + 10.660 MT= 30.883 MT) seized from the godown of Shri Anil Gadodia situated at A-32, Wazirpur Industrial Area, Opposite J.D. Dharam Kanta, Delhi-52 under panchnama dated 28. 09.2013. xxx xxx xxx (vi) I impose pen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tements dated 28.09.2013, 29.09.2013 and 18.07.2014 of Shri Daljeet as enumerated above." 5. This appeal has been filed by the appellant to assail the aforesaid order dated 30.08.2019 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals). 6. Shri Saurabh Sharma, learned counsel appearing for the appellant has stated that both Anil Gadodia and Mayur Ranjan had challenged the order passed by the adjudicating authority and the Commissioner (Appeals) before the Tribunal and both the appeals were allowed. In respect of the appeal filed by Anil Gadodia, being Customs Appeal No. 52231 of 2019 decided on 19.02.2020, a Division Bench of this Tribunal set aside the order assailed with the following observations: "The brief facts of the case are that the DRI on 28.09.2013 detained 5 export consignments of M/s. Eurro Exports at CFS, Mundra, declared to contain marble slabs. Out of 5 containers, in the 4 containers a total of 14.25 MTs of red sanders were found concealed behind crates containing 93.31MTs of marble slabs. Since, export of red sanders was prohibited as per Foreign Trade Policy during the relevant period, the red sanders as well as the marble used for concealing the red sanders were....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the red senders in Government auction and trade within the country, therefore, by any stretch of imagination it cannot be construed that the goods lying with the appellant were attempted to the export. 10. In our view, in order to establish that there is attempt to export it is necessary that either the goods have entered into port area or if it is outside port area there should be some documents such as invoice/shipping bill/LR for transportation of goods to the port etc. In the present case goods were lying much away from the port area i.e. the goods were lying at Delhi whereas it was alleged that the goods supposed to be exported from Mundra port. In absence of any such evidence and with facts that the appellant is engaged in the trading of red senders domestically, there is no support of any evidence, in the allegation of the Revenue that the goods red senders attempted to export as prohibited goods. The appellant also submitted that even in case of goods found loaded in the container at port, the appellant was exonerated from any alleged wrong doing. It was also submitted that the same statements were relied upon in the case of seizure of four containers and in the p....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rtment had challenged both the orders passed by the Tribunal in the matter of Anil Gadodia and Mayur Ranjan before the Delhi High Court in CUSAA 55/2021 and CUSAA 10/2022. 9. In the matter of Anil Gadodia, the following order was passed by the Delhi High Court: ORDER "1. Learned counsel for applicant submits that he has instructions to withdraw the appeal on account of low tax effect. 2. The appeal is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn." 10. In the matter of Mayur Ranjan, the following order was passed by the Delhi High Court: "[Physical court hearing/ hybrid hearing (as per request)] 1. Mr Harpreet Singh, learned senior standing counsel, draws our attention to the Central Board of Excise & Customs' [CBEC] circular bearing no. 390/Misc./163/2010-JC, dated 17.12.2015. 2. A perusal of the above-mentioned circular discloses that the appeals having pecuniary impact below Rs.15,00,000/- are not to be preferred by the revenue before the High Court." 11. Learned counsel for the appellant, therefore, submits that this appeal filed by Saurav Chopra, should also be allowed for the reason that the Tribunal had examined the issue on merits....