TMI Blog2008 (3) TMI 159X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri A. P. S. Suri, Jt. CDR, for the Respondent. [Order per: M. Veeraiyan, Member (T)]. - After hearing both sides for some time on stay petitions, we felt that the appeal itself could be decided finally, and accordingly we waive pre-deposit of the dues as per the order-in-original and proceed to dispose of the appeal. 2. The relevant facts, in brief, are as follows :- (i) The appellant company M/s. Munjal Showa Ltd. imported consignments through ICD Ballabgarh using transfer release advices (TRA) issued by Mumbai Customs House. (ii) The Customs authorities, Ballabgarh initiated verification with the Mumbai Customs authorities and came to know that the DEPB licences based on which TRAs were iss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... scrips. The appellants wanted the said Shri Bishnoi to be cross-examined before the adjudicating authority and the same had been rejected. He also submits that the appellants were not knowing that DEPB scrips were forged and they had no intention to evade Customs duty. Therefore, he assailed the demand on limitation as well. 4. The learned Joint CDR submits that fraud vitiates every transaction; that a fraud inter vivos stands on a different footing from a fraud against the State. The appellant company has not proved that they were bona fide purchasers of DEPB scrips. But for the intervention by the department, the fraud would have gone unnoticed causing heavy damage to the revenue and that the appellants have taken calculated risk ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the recovery of the licence value they had paid and that later Mr. Bishnoi has denied everything he promised to them. From these one thing is clear. The appellant company themselves have come to a conclusion that the licences are forged. They are not contesting that the licences are forged. They are claiming that they were not having knowledge when they used those licences and that they are only victims of fraud by others. Forged licences have no legal sanctity or validity. On a forged licence, the benefit of exemption notification cannot be allowed as it will amount to legalizing fraud. We are of the considered view that no benefit arising out of fraud cannot be claimed by the appellant company. 6.1 It is one thing to deny the bene ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f. The goods have not been seized during investigation and were not available for confiscation at the time of adjudication. As the goods have been cleared using forged licences, they are, no doubt, liable for confiscation. When they are not available for confiscation, it cannot be actually confiscated. Section 126 of the Customs Act envisages that when any goods are' confiscated such goods thereupon vest in the Central Government and that the officer adjudging confiscation shall take and hold possession of the confiscated goods. Only after confiscation is ordered, the question of giving option of redemption arises. Section 125 envisages an option being given by the adjudicating authority to the owner or the person from whose possession the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
