TMI Blog2009 (4) TMI 1044X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f goods imported restricted items showing them to be freely importable items under the open general license category . Two such consignments were cleared as assorted printed books in the Bills of Entry dated 13th January 2009 in the International Container Depot (ICD), Tughalakabad. When the consignments were intercepted by the DRI the goods were found to be used clothes and other restricted items which were required to be imported only by means of a license. Further investigation revealed that more than 28 consignments had been imported from February 2008 till January 2009 which were cleared through M/s. Fantastic Cargo Movers (FCM), a partnership firm of Gaurav Gupta and Vijay Sagar who used CHA codes of other CHA firms. They took the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsignments cleared between February 2008 and January 2009 at nil rate of duty by misdeclaring the goods as assorted printed books. He provided the names and IEC codes of the importer firm to the buyer party. He used to charge ₹ 3,85,000/- per container. For clearance of consignments of worn out garments, he received ₹ 2,20,000/- per container through Amit Sharma and Ajay Sagar who in turn were in direct contact with the importer. He forged the import documents such as Bill of Lading, packing list and invoice and used to maintain bank account in the name of his driver. It is stated that Vijay Sagar got 1414 consignments imported in the name of 11 firms knowing that the actual importers were someone else. 5. Ajay Sagar the el ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fabrication of documents. It is submitted that since the clearance of consignments was through a computerised system, it was not possible to manipulate documents as alleged by the DRI. Two of the accused are stated to be absconding. It is submitted that when the main accused who have benefitted from the transactions are themselves out on bail there is no reason to deny bail to the Petitioners. 8. This Court is unable to accept the above submission. The evidence in the form of the statements made by the Petitioners under Section 108 Customs Act, 1962 implicate them. Unlike the statements made to the police in a regular criminal investigation, the statements made under Section 108 Customs Act, 1962 are admissible in evidence. 9. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for any IPC offence for commission of forgery and therefore the offence is not a grave one does not impress this Court. The manner of commission of offence which has resulted in large scale loss of revenue is grave enough for declining the prayer of the Petitioners for bail at this stage. 12. For the aforementioned reasons, this Court is not inclined to release the Petitioners on bail. It is however made clear that nothing contained in this order is intended to influence the opinion to be formed by any subordinate court when approached for similar relief by either of the Petitioners at a subsequent stage. Such prayer will be considered on its merits independent of the present order. 13. The petition is accordingly dismissed. - - T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
