Undue export benefit allegation based on corroborated statements not sustainable

Dinesh Sharma Vs Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) (CESTAT Delhi)

Held that show cause notice and impugned order both confirmed allegation of undue export benefit relying heavily on the statement which was not supported by any corroborative evidence cannot be sustained.

Facts- The brief issues involved in these appeals are whether (i) the appellants are bona fide exporters or simply freight forwarders, (ii) the appellant(s) are bogus firms, and (iii) whether the appellant(s) overvalued the exported goods for availing undue Drawback/DEPB benefits.

Conclusion-

The show cause notice and the impugned order rely heavily on statements which are not corroborated; the main person who is alleged to be a freight forwarder was questioned continuously for four days and he has retracted the statements at the immediate opportunity.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.