Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2018 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (6) TMI 489 - AT - CustomsPrinciples of natural justice denied - non-speaking order - Mis-declaration of export goods - Advance License Scheme - it was alleged that Advance licences were obtained by mis-declaring the goods exported as 100% Polyester Filament yarn whereas these were actually manmade fibre made from 100% polyester staple fibre - penalty. Held that:- It is seen that both the sides have cited plethora of case laws which are relevant to the facts of the case. The impugned order does not examine any of arguments or the case law. It grants relief by just stating that there is no need to discuss the case law. To that extent the impugned order is not a speaking order. The grounds of review are very limited on this issue. There is merit in the grounds of appeal as the impugned order does not deal with the case laws on the issue but relies on the same. It is not clear as to which case laws he has relied upon and for what reasons. As can be seen from arguments of both sides there are plethora of case law on the issue and Commissioner was required to examine the same and state specifically why he agrees or disagrees with them. The impugned order in so far as it relates to the appeal filed by revenue against the transferee importers is concerned is not a speaking order and is therefore set aside and the matter remanded to the original adjudicating authority to determine the issue afresh with cogent reasons and speaking order - matter on remand. Penalty u/s 112(a) and 114(i) of the CA 1962 - Held that:- The persons whose signatures were forged were stated to be scientists and in-charge of SASMIRA, authorized signatory of steamer agents, appraisers, IAO, Clerks, Assistant Collectors Preventive Officers etc. in his statement he also stated that besides forging the signatures on bills of lading and SASMIRA test report, he had also forged the signatures of the Appraising Officers in the Part–F of the DEEC book for the purpose of auditing. Shri Ashok Pokharkar had also admitted in his statement that Shri Balchander V. Jhadav had forged the documents - the penalty on Sh Jhadav is fully justified. Part matter on remand - partly in favor of Revenue.
|