DELUXE KNITTING MILL, CARGOMAR Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appellant in Appeal No. C/438/2000 had presented 4 Shipping Bills dated 29.12.1998 through their CHA M/s. Cargomar (appellant in Appeal No. C/439/2000) for export of garments under claim for drawback. The export documents contained entries which made it appear that the goods had been duly examined by the proper officer of Customs in the port premises and presented for export prior to 31.12.1998. On the basis of such representation by the exporter and their CHA, "let export" order was issued. The goods were accordingly shipped and the exporter received proceeds thereof. Subsequently, upon investigations, the authorities found that the goods had not been brought into the port area on or before 31.12.1998 and that the same were brought into port area on or after 03.01.1999 and thereafter stuffed and subsequently exported. The Investigations revealed that the examination report was not genuine. The signature of the examiner was fraudulently obtained by the CHA in connivance with the exporter. On these and allied facts, the department issued a show -cause notice to the exporter and their CHA for denying drawback, confiscating the goods and imposing penalties. These proposals were contested. In adjudication of the dispute, learned Commissioner of Customs rejected the drawback claim to the extent of Rs. 2,73,441/ - to the exporter and imposed a penalty of Rs. 50,000/ - on them under Section 114 of the Customs Act. He also imposed a separate penalty of Rs. 25,000 on the CHA. Hence the aforesaid appeals.

(2.) THE appellants in Appeal No. C/463/2000 had also filed similar Shipping Bills on 30.12.1998 through the same CHA claiming drawback. The subsequent developments are similar to what happened in the case of M/s. Deluxe Knitting Mill and the CHA. In the end, the Commissioner of Customs rejected the drawback claim to the extent of Rs. 1,89,623/ - to M/s. Srinivasa Textiles and imposed on them a penalty of Rs. 15,000/ - under Section 114 of the Customs Act, besides a separate penalty on the CHA. The said appeal is against the rejection of drawback claim and the imposition of penalty.

(3.) SHRI Vaishnodevi Mills (P) Ltd. had also exported garments under a few drawback Shipping Bills filed on or before 31.12.1998 in circumstances similar to those which we have already noted in respect of M/s. Deluxe Knitting Mill and M/s. Srinivasa Textiles. The jurisdictional Commissioner rejected their drawback claim, ordered confiscation of the export goods and imposed penalty on the exporter vide Order -in -Original No. 28/2000 dated 03.03.2000. By the same order, the Commissioner imposed a penalty on their CHA viz. M/s. Cargomar also under Section 114 ibid. The exporter's appeal (No. C/380/2000) was allowed by way of remand vide Final Order No. 116/2000 passed by this Bench. The CHA's Appeal No. C/440/2000 is now before us.