9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (2) TMI 810X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd guilty of cheating Customs Department in respect of duty drawback evasion and therefore, the following penalty was imposed on them:- "(xvii) I impose a penalty on the following exporters under Section 114(iii) and 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962. a) Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) on M/s Shri V. Satheesh, proprietor of V.V.S. Exports, Tuticorin. b) Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) on Shri T. Latton Durai, Proprietor of M/s Santhosh Imports & Exports, Tuticorin. c) Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) on Shri A. Maria John Bosco, Proprietor of M/s St. Antony Imports & Exports, Tuticorin. d) Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) on Shri S. Sivakaminathan, Proprietor M / s Shivaa Impex, Tuticorin. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... I impose a penalty of Rs. 25,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Lakhs Only) on Shri T. Joseph John Britto, Proprietor of M/s St. John Britto Exports Logistics, Tuticorin, and M/s Luxury Exports, Tuticorin, under Section 114 and 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962." 2. Aggrieved by the said Order-in-Original, two appeals along with stay applications filed by one Vijay Anand and Kalandar Seeni Ahmed. The appellate Tribunal, while considering the application for waiver of pre-deposit to avail right of appeal, had taken into consideration the plea of these two appellants and had passed the following order:- "7 We are not impressed with the plea of financial hardships raised by Shri Kalandar Seeni Ahmed. This plea is not supported by any evidence. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ar Seeni Ahmed and, thereby, the entire drawback went to his credit. In this scenario, we are not impressed with the plea of Innocence raised by the consultant for Shri VijayAnand. The penalty imposed on him is to the extent of Rs. 50 lakhs. The learned consultant has submitted inter alia that his client received an amount of Rs. 3,000/- per transaction totaling to Rs. 6 lakhs. This itself would prima facie indicate a deliberate involvement of Shri Vijay Anand in the fraudulent transactions. In the facts and circumstances of this case, we are inclined to direct Shri Vijay Anand to predeposit an amount of Rs. 20 lakhs towards the penalty imposed on him. In respect of the joint and several liability fastened on him, there shall be waiver and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d misdeclaration by the appellants to avail duty drawback fraudulently, which came to light in the course of the investigation conducted by Directorate of Revenue Intelligence of Tuticorin Unit and a sum of Rs. 1,94,26,197/- mis-declared as value of the goods exported found to be false and the Commissioner of Customs re-determined the value of the goods as Rs. 13,14,400/- since 14 exporters had exported worn-out goods by misdeclaring it as shoe upper, bed valence, inflatable balls and toys, garments and fabrics by valuing goods unduly in excess with an intention to avail duty drawback facility. Therefore, the Commissioner had rightly held the appellants guilty of mis-declaration and imposed penalty as stated above. 6. The appellate Tribuna ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
