Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2016 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (4) TMI 99 - AT - CustomsBonafideness of appellant in buying and utilising the REP licences issued - Obtained on the basis of fabricated forged documents by others - Whether or not the appellant has a knowledge of fraud by which the licence was obtained from the licensing authority by the transferer - held that:- the REP licences transferred were genuine documents issued by the competent authority. Even if the appellants had made any enquiry with the DGFT themselves as the issuing authority at the time of purchase or utilisation for import of gold, there is no way the validity of REP licence could have been put to question. This is clear from the fact that the fraudulent submission of forged bank document/ shipping bills by the original exporters who obtained the REP licence was unearthed much later by the detailed enquiry of the officers. Here, the REP licences were issued by the competent authority and as such were genuine documents. However, the original parties/ exporters made fraudulent representation by giving forged documents to obtain such REP licences. Demand of duty from the transferers - Held that:- by examining the judgment of Mumbai Tribunal in the case of Sumit Wool Processors Vs. CC [2015 (10) TMI 329 - CESTAT MUMBAI], the duty cannot be demanded from the transferers, where the licences were genuine but obtained by fraudulent representation, they can be made only voidable and imports which happen prior to the cancellation cannot be held as improper. Therefore, duty cannot be demanded. - Decided in favour of appellant
|