NIPPON BEARING PVT. LTD Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE appeals were argued together and are being disposed of by this common order. The facts in Customs Appeal No. 52/2012 are referred to. These appeals question the order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, West Zonal Bench, Mumbai dated 7th May, 2012 : (2014 (303) E.L.T. 454 (Tri. -Mum.)).

(2.) IN the submission of Mr. Jain, learned counsel appearing for the Appellants, these appeals raise a substantial question of law and particularly as formulated by the appellants.

(3.) MR . Jain submits that in September, 1999 the original copy of the Licence was misplaced by Mr. Mehta who also lodged the First Information Report to that effect with the Police Station. At that stage, another licence consultant was engaged for obtaining duplicate copy of the Licence, so also, for obtaining permission for transferability thereof. It is in these circumstances that on 13th October, 1999 an application for enhancement of the value of the Licence was made by M/s. Amrit Laxmi Machine Works. A duplicate licence was issued on 22nd November, 1999 by the Director General of Foreign Trade. Along with the licence, a list of items which could be imported was also issued on 8th December, 1999. The submission is that this list included 4248 pieces of bearings of diameter 10 mm and above. The licence was also revalidated upto 21st November, 1999 with transferability and the CIF value of the licence was also increased. Thus, imports were effected by different importers under cover of 15 Bills of Entry and those Bills of Entry were filed prior to suspension of the Licence and the goods were also cleared. Therefore, this was not a case where the show cause notice could have been issued or if issued, could have been proceeded further. The Adjudicating Authority was, therefore, in complete error in proceeding to adjudicate the show cause notice and imposing penalty, so also, confirming the demand.