DEEPAK JHUNJHUNWALA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Customs Appeal Nos. 34/2011 & 12/2011 are filed by Access Textiles and Deepak Jhunjhunwala respectively challenging the pre-deposit order passed by the CESTAT dated 29th July, 2010. Customs Appeal Nos. 21/2011 & 32/2011 are filed by the Access Textiles and Deepak Jhunjhunwala respectively challenging the Final Order passed by the CESTAT on 29th October, 2010 whereby the appeals filed by them against the order-in-original were dismissed for non-compliance of the pre-deposit order.

(2.) The dispute in all these cases relate to over-invoicing the export goods with a view to avail the enhanced duty drawback. On receiving information regarding over-invoicing, proceedings were initiated in the case of Access Textiles (a sole proprietorship concern of Suresh Jhunjhunwala), and Suresh Enterprises/Shree Deepak Export (both are partnership firms in which Suresh Jhunjhunwala & Deepak Jhunjhunwala are partners). On completion of investigation show-causes notices were issued to the aforesaid entities and also to the partners/proprietor as well as broker and CHA, by relying on the same set of documents. In the adjudication order passed by the Commissioner of Customs, it is clearly recorded that the proceedings initiated against the three entities and also their partners are based on same set of facts and evidence. Admittedly, in the appeals filed by Suresh Enterprises and its sole proprietor Shri Suresh Jhunjhunwala, and in the case of Shree Deepak Exports and its partners, the Tribunal by its order dated 9th April, 2010 [2010 (262) E.L.T. 264 (Tri.-Mumbai)] has granted total waiver of pre-deposit. It is not in dispute that the Revenue has accepted the said decisions of the CESTAT. In these circumstances, in our opinion, if on the same set of facts the duty demand is confirmed by the adjudicating authority in respect of all the three entities and penalty is also imposed and the Tribunal in the case of two entities and its proprietor/partners grants full waiver of pre-deposit, then, it is just and proper that even in the third case, total waiver of pre-deposit ought to be granted. No valid reasons are given by the Tribunal for demanding pre-deposit in the present case. Accordingly, the impugned orders dated 29th July, 2010 and 29th October, 2010 are quashed and set aside and the Tribunal is directed to dispose of the appeals on merits without insisting on pre-deposits. The Appeals are disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.