TMI Blog2008 (6) TMI 600X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ne Gums, M/s. Amba Gums Feeds Product, M/s. D.M. Lakhani Overseas DM Enterprises, M/s. Dave Exports, M/s. Dinesh Ent., M/s. Gandhi Exports Inc., M/s. H.B. Gum Ind Pvt. Ltd. Hathibhai Bhulakidas P. Ltd., M/s. Hindustan Gum Chemicals M/s. JABS International P. Ltd., M/s. Kanu Krishna Corporation, M/s. Lotus Gum Chemicals, M/s. Mahesh Agri Exim P. Ltd., M/s. Modern Gums Chemicals, M/s. R.K. Industries Ltd., M/s. Ruparel Dehydrators P. Ltd., M/s. Sarda Gum Chem., M/s. Sopariwala Exports, M/s. Sterling Export Inc., M/s. Tapan Exports and M/s. Vijaya Enterprises (hereinafter referred to as the co-applicants). 2. The brief facts of the case are elaborately covered in the Admission Order No. 37/Admission Order/CUS/MGR/2008 dated 1-2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 62 with a strict direction that further proceedings in the case shall commence in respect of the application only after the applicant has paid the interest due under Section 28AB. The amount of Rs. 53,00,000/- deposited by the applicant was allowed to be adjusted against the accepted duty liability of Rs. 52,46,637/-. 6. The Advocate of the Applicants, vide letter dated 5-2-2008, submitted that the interest amount has now been worked out to Rs. 8,46 222.76 and has been computed at the rate of 13% per annum and that the same has been paid on 12-3-2008. 7. The final hearing in this case was held on 14-3-2008. The applicant and all the co-applicants except M/s. Adarsh Derivatives were represented by Shri Sujay N. Kantawala, Advocate. The c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sited the entire duty liability and has made a full and true disclosure of its duty liability as well as co-operated in the proceedings before the Commission. He further submitted that the applicant has paid the interest amount of Rs. 8,46,223/- on 12-3-2008 and submitted the TR-6 challan. He, finally, requested that the case may be disposed off by granting immunities from interest, fine, penalty and prosecution. The ld. Advocate of the co-applicant M/s. Adarsh Derivatives submitted that his client is one of the exporters and pleaded for immunity from penalty. 8. The Revenue was represented by Shri D.C. Rawal, Superintendent of Customs, Mundra Port and SEZ, Mundra. The Revenue objected to grant of immunities to the applicant. 9.1 The Be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nalty, because of the special facts circumstances brought out above, Bench considers that ends of justice shall be met by imposition of minimum penalty 9.2 It is further observed that confiscation of the goods is also proposed in the Show Cause Notice. The Bench observes that the goods have already been exported. They are not available for confiscation. It is not the case of the Revenue that some other goods other than what was declared in the shipping bills have been exported. It is not the case of the Revenue that any prohibited goods have been exported. The main charge is that export duty/cess on the goods exported have not been paid. Now the export duty/cess alongwith the interest has been paid. Since the goods have already been exp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
