2026 (7) TMI 1465

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ning of DFIA licenses on the basis of the said exports to get undue benefits of import duty exemption, investigations appear to have been conducted against several exporters viz. M/s. Pan Parag India Ltd., Kanpur, M/s. Kothari Products Ltd., Kanpur, M/s. Kothari Food and Fragrances, Kanpur and M/s. Shiv Shakthi Agri Foods Ltd., Delhi by DRI Lucknow. The investigations appear to have unravelled the contraventions of provisions of Para 4.55.3 of Handbook of Procedure Vol. I of Foreign Trade Policy (FTP) (2004-08) as well as Para 4.32.2 of Handbook of Procedure Vol. I of FTP (2009-14) by the exporters named above which enjoins them to disclose the technical characteristics, quality and specification of the essential oil said to have been used ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., the Assessee appears to have preferred an Appeal before the First Appellate Authority who vide impugned Order-in-Appeal No.203/2016 dated 25.02.2016 having upheld the demand, thereby dismissing the Appeal, the said order has been assigned before us in this Appeal. 4. Shri Roshil Nichani, ld. Advocate appearing for the Appellant contended at the outset, that proceedings against the exporter namely M/s. Pan Parag India Ltd., Kanpur initiated by the Revenue has been held to be void by the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s.Pan Parag India Ltd. & Others vide Final Order No.5043650439/2025 dated 25.03.2025 wherein the Delhi Bench has held that the Revenue had failed to produce any evidence to justify that the goods exported by t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....relied on the orders of the lower authorities. 6. We have carefully considered the facts of the case as presented both in writing as well as verbal and we have also carefully considered the decision/orders relied upon. Appellant has raised a question of time bar however, the issue involved is a mixed question of law and fact and cannot be examined at the threshold. As regards the facts we agree with the contention of the learned Advocate that the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal has, in the case of the exporter viz. M/s.Pan Parag India Ltd. (supra) not only ordered dropping the demand confirmed against the exporter, but also has observed that even the DGFT has only levied penalties without cancelling the license. These findings coupled with t....