UMESH KUMAR vs PR COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS NEW DELHI (PREVENTIVE)

Judgment text excerpt

$~49 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Date of decision: 7th April, 2025 + CUSAA 51/2025 & CM APPLs. 13613/2025 & 13615/2025 UMESH KUMAR .....Appellant Through: Mr. Jitin Singhal, Adv. versus PR COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS NEW DELHI (PREVENTIVE) .....Respondent Through: Ms. Monica Benjamin, SSC with Ms. Nancy Jain, Adv. CORAM: JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH JUSTICE RAJNEESH KUMAR GUPTA Prathiba M. Singh, J. (Oral) 1. This hearing has been done through hybrid mode. 2. The present appeal has been filed by the Appellant – Mr. Umesh Kumar under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962, challenging the Final Order No. FO/C/A/55489/2024- CU(DB) dated 8th April, 2024 (hereinafter, the Impugned Order) passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter, CESTAT). 3. The impugned order is a common order passed in two Customs Appeals before the CESTAT being C/51578/2018 titled Umesh Kumar v. Principal Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi and C/51595/2016 titled Rajat Arora v. Principal Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi. 4. The origin of this case goes back to when the Bill of Entry No.6807339 was filed on 18th September, 2014 by one M/s Aromatech which is a sole proprietary concern of the Appellant– Mr. Umesh Kumar, as the importer of certain goods(hereinafter ‘the said goods’). The Customs Department, upon examination, realized that the said goods were in excess of the declaration in CUSAA 51/2025 Page 1 of 8 Signature Not Verified Signed By:DHIRENDER KUMAR Signing Date:09.04.2025 17:25:25 the Bill of Entry No.6807339 and some goods were, in fact, not declared in the Bill of Entry at all. 5. Investigation further revealed that on a previous occasion as well, the firm had filed 15 Bills of Entry prior to the Bill of Entry No.6807339 by the same importer and in al