Page 18 - ELT_1st September 2020_Vol 373_Part 5

xvi EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 373
EXIM - Duty Free Credit Entitlement Scheme (DFCES) for Status Holders -
Abuse of - Supreme Court in its judgment dated 27-10-2015 [2015 (326)
E.L.T. 26 (S.C.)] in petitioner’s case found them to have resorted to
blatant misuse of the provisions of the Scheme and set aside the direction
of Bombay High Court granting relief to the petitioner under the said
Scheme - Review petition filed by petitioner also dismissed by Supreme
Court - Petitioner certainly could not have been allowed to re-agitate its
eligibility under the Scheme in the guise of a fresh/revised application
after the judgment of the Supreme Court and subsequent dismissal of its
Review Petition - DGFT, New Delhi, Trade Notice No. 6/2018, dated 8-5-
2017 not applicable to petitioner, being clearly applicable to exporters
other than those against whom material had already been placed by
respondents before the Supreme Court of their disentitlement under the
Scheme — Kanak Exports v. Union of India (Del.) ..................... 581
— Duty Free Credit Entitlement Scheme (DFCES) for Status Holders - Abuse
of - As far as seeking parity with M/s. Adani Exports Ltd. is concerned,
there can be no equality achieved in the violation of law - No right
stipulated under Article 14 of Constitution of India in the negative -
Merely because the respondents have granted some relief to M/s. Adani
Exports Ltd. or have not made any recoveries from it, cannot entitle the
petitioner, by itself, to claim benefit under the DFCE Scheme in spite of
the clear and categorical judgment of the Supreme Court holding it to be
not entitled for the same — Kanak Exports v. Union of India (Del.) ........... 581
Export goods, i.e., goods to be exported could be confiscated and not goods
already exported - See under CONFISCATION ................. 692
Exported goods not confiscable as same not available - See under
CONFISCATION .................................. 692
Exports of 100% Organic Cotton Yarn on concessional duty payment, rebate
cannot be denied on ground that goods were exempt under another
notification - See under REBATE .......................... 594
Financial hardship - See under STAY ......................... 579
Finished leather, classification of - See under LEATHER .............. 713
Gold granules import from Indonesia, authorities directed to finalize
provisional assessment as retroactive verification of Country of origin
already completed - See under PROVISIONAL ASSESSMENT ......... 670
Gold smuggling - Evidence - Redemption fine and penalty - Allegations that
foreign marked gold recovered from appellant has been brought from
Nepal, have not been substantiated by Revenue with cogent evidence
warrantying absolute confiscation - However, since appellant has also
not been able to establish as to how he got possession of said gold,
imposition of Redemption Fine and penalty sustainable but reduced -
Sections 112 and 125 of Customs Act, 1962 — Commissioner of Customs (Prev.),
Lucknow v. Rajesh Kumar Seth (Tri. - All.) ......................... 716
— Penalty imposable on co-accused as his role in offence fully established -
See under PENALTY ................................ 705
HANDLING OF CARGO IN CUSTOMS AREAS REGULATIONS, 2009 :
— See under DEMURRAGE .............................. 631
— See under VALUATION (CUSTOMS) ....................... 681
EXCISE LAW TIMES  1st September 2020  18