Riyaz Sayed Abdul Aziz Vs Commissioner of Customs (Export) (CESTAT Mumbai)
CESTAT Mumbai held that imposition of penalty under section 114AA of the Customs Act not justified in absence of any dummy export or any criminal intent involving evasion of duty. Accordingly, provisions are not applicable where export goods have actually been exported.
Facts- The appellant is the sole proprietor of M/s Rishay International which was involved in export of Ready-Made Garments (RMG) and fabrics to African countries, mostly to Nigeria, and they had availed customs duty drawback benefits in respect of such exports allegedly in an irregular manner by gross over-valuation of export goods.
On completion of detailed investigation, the Customs department had alleged that M/s Rishay International had exported low value goods by over valuation and availed ineligible drawback, in a fraudulent manner, in number of export consignments.
Accordingly, customs authorities had issued Show Cause Notice (SCN) dated 30.11.2022 proposing for recovery of drawback availed irregularly under Rule 16 of the Customs, Central Excise Duties & Service Tax Drawback Rules, 1995, where no Bank Realisation Certificates (BRCs) have been received towards sale proceeds of export goods; confiscation of export goods valued at Rs.3931.79 lakhs under sub-sections (d), (i), (ia) of Section 113 of the Customs Act, 1962; and for imposition of penalty on the appellant and other co-noticees u/s. 114(i)/114(iii), 114AA ibid.
