Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S. Qimiti Lal Sharma vs Commissioner Of Customs, Amritsar on 22 May, 2014
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI PRINCIPAL BENCH, COURT NO. II Customs Appeal No. 620 of 2008 - Cus[DB] [Arising out of Order-in-Original No. 64/Cus/Ldh/08 dated 10.06.08 passed by Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, Chandigarh] M/s. Qimiti Lal Sharma Appellants Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Amritsar Respondent
Appearance:
Ms. Surbhi Sinha, Advocate for the Appellants Shri V.P. Batra, AR for the Respondent CORAM:
Hon'ble Mr. D N Panda, Judicial Member Hon'ble Mr. Manmohan Singh, Technical Member Date of Hearing /decision: 22.05.2014 ORDER NO. FO/ 52308/2014-Cus(BR) Per D N Panda (for the Bench):
The primary allegation of Revenue is that the CHA appellant Qmity Lal was involved in the mis-declaration of export to enable the exporter to make fraudulent claim of DEPB benefit for which he was bound to suffer penalty of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only). On the other hand, appellants submission is that without knowledge of CHA, the shipping bill was filed and appellant does not know who is that Vijay Madaan who forged signature of the appellant and filed respective antedated documents.
2. Learned DR brings out that this appellant has not made reply to the show cause notice nor appeared for hearing on the appointed date. According to Revenue, such practice was followed by appellant to escape liability and to create doubt against Vijay Madaan.
3. Para 47 of the adjudication order reveals that one Shri Vijay Madaan who was representative of CHA appellant had forged signatures and also substituted antedated documents to defraud Revenue. It also appears that some of the customs officers were involved in the fraud. Shri M P Singh, Inspector brought out above fact. There is no evidence to show that the appellant was innocent and without his knowledge the documents were filed. He had not taken any legal action against Vijay Madaan. Customs area is a sensitive place where the protection of Revenue as well as security of the country is involved. Therefore we send back the matter to learned Adjudicating authority to make a full inquiry as to ascertain who had forged the signatures and who were involved in antedating the documents and issuing summons to Qimiti Lal Sharma and also Vijay Madaan shall discover the truth behind the scene. Learned advocate says that she is unable to seek instructions of her client today. She prays that reasonable time may be granted for causing appearance by her client. Keeping such prayer in view, the appellant is directed to cause appearance before learned adjudicating authority on 4.6.2014 at 10.30 AM and to participate for the inquiry as well as readjudication of the matter. Learned authority shall take into consideration the result of his enquiry before passing the order confronting the same to the appellant.
4. In the result, the appeal is disposed of with the directions aforesaid.
(Dictated and Pronounced in the open court)
( D N Panda ) Member(Judicial)
(Manmohan Singh) Member(Technical)
ss
??
??
??
??
3