Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s Petrosolv India Company, Shri Bhaskar Kolakkat, Shri Rajasekhar Pillai Versus CC (Export) Nhava Sheva And CCE, Mumbai Versus M/s Sai Shraddha Exim Pvt. Ltd.

2017 (12) TMI 282 - CESTAT MUMBAI

Absolute confiscation of export goods - soap stone powder - misdeclaration of description of goods - penalty - Held that: - Entire investigation result brought out above said material facts and evidence and unerringly established that the Appellant M/s Petroslov India was instrumental to export soap stone powder in the name of SSEPL with the conscious involvement of SSEPL. That remained uncontroverted by appellants without leading any cogent and credible evidence. Considering the role played by .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

bills for export of misdeclared goods - Export formalities were completed by M/s Sai Shipping Agency involving all the three appellants. - penalty on all appellants upheld. - Confiscation of goods u/r 25 of CEA, 1944 - redemption fine - penalty - Held that: - Revenue proved entire malafide design of the appellants who committed fraud against Customs filing false documents, misdeclaring description and value of goods and they could not come out with clean hands to prove their innocence, they .....

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 for Appellant Ms. Ahibaran, Addl. Commr. (AR) for Respondent ORDER Per: Dr. D. N. Panda: None present for the appellant. 2. Several opportunities were given to the appellants issuing notice from time to time to cause appearance and explain their case. But they did not respond to such notice. Noticing that Revenue s interest has been prejudiced, the matter has been taken up for hearing with assistance of Revenue and disposed by this common order having arisen out of common cause, on the basis o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

xported misdeclaring the description of the said goods as Amoxycillin Trihydrate of 13 MT and Cefadroxil of 0.5 MT. Adjudication resulted in imposition of penalty of ₹ 1,52,60,076/- on that concern under Section 114(i) and 114(ii) of Customs Act, 1962. M/s Petrosolv India Company who is the appellant in the present batch of appeals faced penalty of ₹ 5 lakhs under Section 114(i), 114(ii) and 114(iii) of the Act and the other two appellants who were Managing Director and Director of S .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

suing CT-I form. Instead of exporting such bulk drug, Soap stone powder were exported in the place of bulk drug as was found by investigation on physical examination of the container exported, but called back by them. Physical examination of the said container revealed that 13.5 MT of soap stone powder was packed therein in 540 carbouys covered by 14 shipping bills filed by SSEPL misdeclaring description of the goods covered by said shipping bills as 13 MT of Amoxycillin Trihydrate and 0.5 MT of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

urse of search which proved its procurement of bulk drug from M/s Surya Pharmaceutical Ltd. against form No. CT-1, but such goods were not exported. The appellant M/s Petrosolv India Company was the conduit who arranged purchase of stone soap powder from M/s Udaipur Minerals Development Syndicate Pvt. Ltd. and carbouys from others for dispatch of the same for export on behalf of SSEPL in place of bulk drug to avail DEEC benefit by SSEPL. 2.4 Investigation revealed that fraudulent export of soap .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

oncerns in the course of search as has been recorded in the adjudication order and that remained unrefuted. M/s Sai Shradha Exim Pvt Ltd as a merchant exporter made above fraudulent export under DEEC using license of M/s Sun Pharmaceutical Ltd. 2.5 During investigation, statement of Shri Bhaskar Kolakkat M.D of M/s Sai Shradha Exim Pvt Ltd was recorded wherein he admitted that the goods exported under 14 shipping bills were not bulk drugs as declared but were soap stone powder. He also admitted .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

id godown. The sellers of such goods confirmed the sale. He also arranged transportation of the exported goods from the godown premise to Punjab Conware, Nhavasheva. This was confirmed by the transporter BLR Transport Pvt. Ltd. Even seller of stone soap powder M/s Udaipur Minerals Development Syndicate Pvt. Ltd. established the sale thereof to SSEPL. 2.7 In his statement one Mr. Charles Patrick, Managing Partner of M/s Petroslov India Co. admitted that Shri Subramaniam Devar was appointed as 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

abour and he was paid for this work by the company. 2.9 Entire investigation result brought out above said material facts and evidence and unerringly established that the Appellant M/s Petroslov India was instrumental to export soap stone powder in the name of SSEPL with the conscious involvement of SSEPL. That remained uncontroverted by appellants without leading any cogent and credible evidence. Considering the role played by the logistics manager Shri Subramaniam Devar and godown keeper Shri .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f misdeclared goods. Their plea that they were not aware about the activities of Shri Subramaniam Devar remained in myth when investigation brought on record their awareness and involvement in substitution of goods by stone powder and purchase of empty barrels, carbouys as well as soap stones powder, followed by packing and transpiration thereof. Export formalities were completed by M/s Sai Shipping Agency involving all the three appellants. Accordingly they were held liable to penalty of ?15 la .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

2002 on M/s Sai Shradha Exim Pvt Ltd, for which Revenue has been aggrieved. 5. According to the learned Adjudicating authority, he did not confiscate the cleared bulk drug because goods were not available for confiscation. He did not impose redemption fine on the ground that the goods were cleared under the B-1 bond and said bonds do not have any provision for redemption fine. But Revenue s contention is that Adjudicating Authority failed to appreciate that B-1 Bond was executed to cover the du .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

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

Go to Mobile Version