P.G. FOILS LTD. Vs. COMMR. OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellants filed this appeal against the order -in -appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals).

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that the appellants filed shipping bills for export of aluminium foils under DEPB Scheme. In the shipping bills, appellants declared the goods as aluminium foil paper backed and claimed DEPB benefit under group head 61 Sr. No. 503. During the time of processing of the shipping bills and examination of the goods, it was found that the goods, in question, were not aluminium foil paper backed but, in fact, are aluminium foils interleaved with paper. The DEPB benefit on the laminated/lacquered aluminium foils is available under DEPB group head 61 Sr. No. 505. The adjudicating authority confiscated the goods on the ground that the appellants intentionally mis -declared the goods to avail more DEPB benefit and ordered release of the goods on redemption fine of Rs. one lakh and penalty of Rs. 10,000/ - was imposed. Appellants filed appeal and the Commissioner (Appeals), in the impugned order, held that the goods, in question, are not covered under Sr. No. 503 or 505 of DEPB group head 61.

(3.) The contention of the appellants is that the adjudicating authority held that the goods, in question, are covered under group head 61 Sr. No. 505. Against this finding, the revenue had not filed any appeal. Therefore, the finding of the Commissioner (Appeals) that the goods are not covered even under Sr. No. 505, of DEPB group head 61, is not sustainable. The contention of the appellants is also that on previous occasions, the appellants made an export of the same goods and claimed the benefit under Sr. No. 503 of DEPB group head 61 which was duly allowed. Therefore, under the bona fide belief that the goods are covered under Sr. No. 503 of DEPB group head 61, they filed the present shipping bills. Therefore, there was no intention of the appellants to mis -declare the goods to avail more DEPB benefit.