Page 255 - ELT_2nd_15th April 2020_Vol 372_Part

2020 ] AMAN BADHWAR v. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, NEW DELHI 301

ture on these documents were that of the appellant, it was emphatically submit-
ted that no money was paid by the appellant for the shares shown in the said
document. All the expenses in regard to opening the company and bank ac-
counts were born by Sh. Neelesh Bhandari.
21. However, appellant was surprised to receive Show Cause Notice
No. DRI F. No. 33A/XI/32/2013-CI(JG), dated 24-11-2014 issued by the Addi-
tional Director General, DRI (Headquarters), New Delhi wherein the appellant,
who himself was a victim of conspiracy by unscrupulous persons including his
cousins Anirudh Palta and their friend Neelesh Bhandari, was equated with oth-
er fraudsters and penalty proceedings were initiated against him. The appellant
had disclosed all the facts to the DRI officers during their investigations and had
cooperated fully with them.
22. The appellant submitted his reply to the above mentioned show
cause notice on 8-9-2015. While stating the above mentioned facts in his reply,
the appellant had further submitted that he had never dealt with M/s. Moral
Colour Limited in any manner. In respect of Bills of Entry Nos. 3657538, dated
28-10-2013 and 3771844, dated 11-11-2013 and 3771845 dated 11-11-2013 and re-
lated documents which had shown export of rough Diamonds by M/s. Moral
Colour Limited, Hong Kong to M/s. Jitendra Gems Limited, Surat, Gujarat, the
appellant had pointed out that Invoice No. EXP/RF/26, dated 28-10-2013 had
been signed by Sh. Nilesh and in the Kimberley Process Certificate (Export) No.
HK1323021, dated 30-10-2013 the ‘Exporter’s Declaration’ was signed by one
Bhagat Dhawal (who may be an associate of Sh. Neelesh).
23. It was also submitted that the appellant had no knowledge of M/s.
Jitendra Gems Pvt. Ltd., Surat, Gujarat. Immediately on coming to know that
bank accounts opened in the name of the appellant in Hong Kong were being
misused, the appellant had written to the banks to freeze those accounts.
24. It was also submitted that provisions of Section 114AA of the Cus-
toms Act, 1962 were not attracted in the case of the appellant as he had neither
knowingly or intentionally made, signed or used nor had caused to be made
signed or used any false declaration etc. and it was only his lack of knowledge
and innocence, which was misused by his cousins in obtaining his signatures on
various documents.
25. The appellant had returned from Hong Kong on 26-2-2013 whereas
the misdeclared consignments of Rough Diamonds, which were eventually
seized by DRI on 26-11-2013 had arrived at Air Cargo, New Delhi on 11-11-2013
and 26-11-2013 respectively, i.e. after nine months of appellants arrival from
Hong Kong. Under such circumstances, the appellant could not have dealt with
or handled the said shipments at Hong Kong nor could he sign any documents
related to it.
26. Other accused in this case had clearly admitted to they had facilitat-
ed import of Rough Diamonds from Hong Kong based company M/s. Moral
Colour Limited.
27. Para 27.2.7 of the show cause notice had clearly recorded that the
Directors of the company (Moral Colour Limited) did not know anything about
the activities of the company and were namesake only.
28. Para 9 of the show cause notice had clearly stated that one Shri
Meena Heeralal, A-I, Gopal Bari, Next to Ajmer Road Flyover, Jaipur was the
EXCISE LAW TIMES  15th April 2020  271