Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s Pee Jay International Versus Commissioner of Customs

2016 (9) TMI 722 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT

Cancellation of DEPB issued - withdrawal of benefits availed on the basis of DEPB - demand of customs duty and SAD - confiscation under section 111 of the Customs Act, 1962 - option to pay redemption fine of ₹ 1,00,000/- under section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962 - principle of "buyer be ware" - whether duty can be demanded from an importer who is not a party to fraud committed by an exporter ? - Held that: - similar issue decided in many cases one such being Commissioner of Customs, Amrit .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ent, though obtained by seller by producing some forged documents, to which the appellant was not a party - duty not demanded from the buyer - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - CUSAP No. 13 of 2014 (O&M) - Dated:- 7-9-2016 - Rajesh Bindal And Harinder Singh Sidhu, JJ. Mr. Jagmohan Bansal, Advocate for the appellant Mr. Sharan Sethi, Advocate, Mr. Amit Goyal for the respondent ORDER Rajesh Bindal J. 1. This order will dispose of two appeals bearing CUSAP Nos. 13 and 14 of 2014, as .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

against the appellant is sustainable when demand against identically situated persons has already been dropped ? (c) Whether extended period of limitation can be invoked, in view of various judgments of this Hon'ble Court ? (d) Whether impugned order is perverse and contrary to record ? 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant purchased one DEPB scrip No. 3010006203 dated 10.10.2000 from M/s Beni Exports, Jalandhar. The same was utilised for discharging duty liabilit .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t and the date on which it was utilised for payment of duty, it was a valid scrip, hence, the appellant cannot be made liable for any action. The department may take action against the person, who got DEPB issued by submitting forged documents. The adjudicating authority confirmed the demand. The order was upheld in appeal by the first appellate authority as well as the Tribunal. 5. While referring to the order passed by the first appellate authority, learned counsel for the appellant submitted .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

favour of the appellant, penalty was set aside. In case, the appellant had been afforded opportunity of hearing before cancellation of DEPB granted to the person, from whom he had purchased, the appellant could have raised legal issues to defend the case as ultimately on account of cancellation of DEPB, which was issued to a third party, from whom the appellant had purchased the same, the appellant cannot be made to suffer. It was a bonafide purchase for consideration. Relying upon the judgment .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

td., decided on 21.4.2009 and M/s Gheru Lal Bal Chand v. State of Haryana and another, 2011(4) PLR 440, it was submitted that in case the benefit under DEPB purchased by a person for consideration had been utilised before it was cancelled, the importer cannot be made liable for any action. Action can be taken against the person who committed fraud. He further submitted that in the case of the appellant, DEPB itself was not a forged document. He further submitted that even the larger Bench of the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of DEPB from the person who had obtained the same by submitting forged documents, is also liable. Earlier order passed by this court in Munjal Showa Limited v. Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise (Delhi (IV), Faridabad, 2009 (246) ELT 18 (P&H) was referred to, where on the principle of buyer be ware , purchaser of DEPB was held liable as it was his duty to ascertain whether the scrip being purchased by it was forged or not. In the case in hand, the appellant as well could have made en .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

y the appellant vide Bill of Entries dated 12.10.2000 and 19.10.2000. More than one year thereafter, Director General of Foreign Trade cancelled DEPB issued to M/s Beni Exports, Jalandhar vide order dated 24.10.2001. As a result thereof, the appellant was issued show cause notice dated 14.11.2002 for withdrawing the benefits already availed of on the basis of DEPB purchased by the appellant. After considering the reply filed by the appellant, the adjudicating authority vide order dated 24.5.2005 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

osed. In appeal filed by the appellant against the aforesaid order before the Commissioner (Appeals), the demand of duty was confirmed, however, penalty was set aside. The Commissioner (Appeals), while setting aside the penalty, recorded the following findings: As regards to imposition of penalty of ₹ 4,85,453/- and ₹ 30,000/- on the appellant No. 1 and 2 under Section 114A and Section 112 of the Act respectively, I find that there is nothing on record to prove in any way that they h .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

iple of buyer be ware . However, another Member opined that the appeal filed by the assessee was required to be allowed, whereas the revenue's appeal was meritless. The matter was referred to be considered by third Member on difference of opinion. After the matter was considered by third Member, the appeal filed by the appellant as well as the department were rejected. The department was raising the issue regarding levy of penalty, whereas the appellant was concerned about the demand of duty .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

same view was later followed in Fertichem India and M/s Deebee Marketing Pvt. Ltd.'s cases (supra). 12. The judgment of this Court in Munjal Showa Limited's case (supra) is distinguishable on facts as in that case, transfer release advices issued against DEPB scrip were forged and even DEPBs were also forged. There was no finding recorded by the Tribunal or the authorities in that case that the assessee acted bonafide. The earlier judgments of this court in Vallabh Design Products and Le .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

le relying upon the earlier judgment of this court in Munjal Showa Limited's case (supra) specifically noticing that the Tribunal in that case had recorded a finding that bonafides had not been established by the assessee, hence, the assessee was not entitled to place reliance upon the judgment of this court in Leader Valves Ltd.'s case (supra). In Friends Trading Co. v. Union of India, 2010 (254) ELT 652 (P&H), the earlier judgment in Munjal Showa Limited's case (supra) was foll .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e in a case where the scrip is genuine, but for the purpose of issuance thereof, the party concerned may have used some forged documents. 15. A similar issue was considered by a Division Bench of this Court in M/s Gheru Lal Bal Chand's case (supra). It was a case, where under Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003, a purchasing dealer is entitled to get input tax credit on production of a statutory form. The claim was sought to be denied by the department while holding that the statement made in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

eof are extracted below: 25. In legal jurisprudence, the liability can be fastened on a person who either acts fraudulently or has been a party to the collusion or connivance with the offender. However, law nowhere envisages to impose any penalty either directly or vicariously where a person is not connected with any such event or an act. Law cannot envisage an almost impossible eventuality. The onus upon the assessee gets discharged on production of Form VAT C-4 which is required to be genuine .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nd 19 of the Constitution of India. 26. The rule of interpretation requires that such meaning should be assigned to the provision which would make the provision of the Act effective and advance the purpose of the Act. This should be done wherever possible without doing any violence to the language of the provision. For Subsequent orders see CUSAP-14-2014 A statute has to be read in such a manner so as to do justice to the parties. If it is held that the person who does not deposit or is required .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version