TMI Blog2006 (4) TMI 45X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t) and Shri Nazim Sayani (hereinafter referred to as the co-applicant). 2. The facts of the case are that on the basis of an intelligence that cigarettes were being imported by concealing those among electronic consumables in container bearing No. CRXU 9175800 with an intention to smuggle them into India, the officers of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI), Mumbai Zonal Unit located the said container at Jawaharlal Nehru Port Nhava Sheva and put the same on hold on 29-7-2005. The container was shifted to M/s. Translndia Logistic Park-Container Freight Station, Nhava Sheva on 30-7-2005 for examination. The officers also perused the Bills of Entry No. 926436, dated 29-7-2005 for the said container from EDI system of Jawaharlal Neh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ad visited Dubai and worked out the entire plan of smuggling and had also interacted with the clearing agent Mr. Rakesh Bhanushali and appointed him for clearance of the impugned consignment. The co-applicant had arranged for the DEPB licences. 4. After the investigations a Show Cause Notice vide F.No. DRI/ NS/INV-02/05-06/94, dated 25-1-2006 was issued to the applicant and the co-applicant under the Customs Act, 1962 (in short the Act) proposing to :- (i) Confiscate the cigarettes totally valued at Rs. 4,75,220.65 (ii) Confiscate the mini RCRs totally valued at Rs. 8,71,665.65 (iii) Demanding Customs duty of Rs. l0,96,339.24 in respect of the cigarettes. (iv) Seeking to adjust the balance Customs duty o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... I.O. from DRI, Mumbai. The Revenue had no objection for admission and final disposal of the case. 8. Pleading his case for immunities the ld. Advocate submitted that the entire incident had occurred due to mistake of the overseas supplier who had mistakenly put the consignments at cigarettes in the container. He further submitted that the applicant had admitted the entire duty as demanded in the Show Cause Notice and had co-operated with the proceedings before the Commission. In fine he pleaded for immunities from fine, interest and penalty to the applicant and co-applicant as applicable. The Bench pointed out to the ld. Advocate that the co-applicant was involved in the case of M/s. Ally Enterprises settled by the Commission vide Final ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t fulfils all the conditions laid down under Section 127B of the Act. The Bench therefore allows the applications filed by the applicant and the co-applicant to be proceeded with under Section 127C(1) of the Act. The applicant has already deposited an amount of Rs. 8,00,000/- as personal deposit, Rs. 1,33,365/- by debiting 3 DEPB Licences for Customs duty and Rs. 1,96,800/- by TR-6 challan . The said amounts are allowed to be adjusted against the admitted duty liability of the applicant. The Bench further observes that the applicant has co-operated in the case proceedings and has made full and true disclosure of the duty liability. The Bench accordingly settles the case under Section 127C(7) of the Act on the following terms and conditions: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e applicant u/s. 112 of the Act. The penalty amounts shall be appropriated from the sale proceeds. Prosecution : The Bench grants immunity to the applicant and the co-applicant from prosecution under sub-section (1) of Section 127H of the Act. 11. After adjustment of the duty, fine and the penalties the balance amount recovered from the disposal of the cigarettes shall be refunded to the applicant. 12. Attention of the applicants is invited to the provisions under sub-sections (2) and (3) of Section 127H ibid. 13. This order of settlement shall be void in terms of sub-section (9) of Section 127C of the Act, if the Settlement Commission subsequently finds that it has been obtained by fraud or misrepresentation of facts. 14. All con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
