COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (P) Vs. MAHESH GOENKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Revenue is in appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai vacating show cause notice for confiscation of polyester fabrics and vacating the proposal for imposition of penalty on M/s. Chemco Exports (P) Ltd. Exporter of the fabrics (the show cause notice was issued to the exporters proposing confiscation and proposing imposition of penalty) on the ground that they had deliberately misdeclared one of the goods with a mala fide intention to fulfil export obligation in terms of quantity against the advance licence under the DEEC scheme for exporting lesser quantity and getting the higher import entitlement.

(2.) WE have heard the Id. SDR and perused the records as none appears for the respondent in spite of notice. The DEEC benefit has been restricted to the quantity of actual export. As regards, the confiscation and penalty which is the subject matter of the present appeal, we note that in the case of Shilpi Exports v. Collector of Customs, Calcutta , the Tribunal had held that under Section 113(d) of the Customs Act, was not applicable as export goods in question were not prohibited goods and such goods were not liable to confiscation and the exporters not liable to penalty. The above decision has been upheld by the Apex Court by the dismissal of the appeal filed by the Revenue against the Tribunal's order, as seen from 2000 (115) E.L.T. A219. Hence, no interference with the impugned order by which the proposal for confiscation of goods and imposition of penalty on the exporters has been dropped, is called for. Accordingly, we uphold the impugned order and reject the appeal.