2001 (11) TMI 153

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the licences from the appropriate authorities. These licences were then sold/transfered to other persons. The transferee buyers imported certain goods without payment of duty. The Commissioner of Customs in adjudication held that M/s. Jupiter Exports were "deemed importers" in terms of Customs Notification No. 204/92. He confirmed the duty upon M/s. Jupiter Exports and imposed penalties upon them and the three partners in the said firm. Against this judgment 4 appeals were filed which were disposed of by the Tribunal vide Final Order Nos. C-I/347-50/WZB/2001, dated 5-2-2001 [2001 (131) E.L.T. 147 (T)]. Before the Tribunal the misdeeds of M/s. Jupiter Exports were pointed out by the Departmental Representative. The Tribunal appreciated the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the licence but could be demanded only from the persons who actually imported the goods; has been laid down in a number of earlier judgments including. In the case of Elecon Engineering Co. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Cus. [1999 (111) E.L.T. 509 (Tribunal)] as also in the case of Geekay Exim (India) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs (AP), Mumbai. [2001 (46) RLT 709 (CEGAT-Mum.)]. 5. We also note a judgment of the Calcutta High Court in the case of Sancheti Food Products Ltd. v. Union of India [1993 (67) E.L.T. 248 (Cal.)] in which it was held that the fact that a reference application under Section 130(3) of the Act, (as it then was) was made did not act as a stay of operation of the Tribunal's order. 6. Shri Pundir, Joint Chief Department....