Ask Jurishour AI

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
tdb_templates
saswp_reviews
saswp-collections
saswp_rvs_location
tdc-review-email
web-story-font
web-story
googlesitekit_email
tds_locker
tds_email
saswp
mailpoet_page
mailpoet_email
tdcpt_tunes
tdc-review
pronamic_payment
pronamic_gateway
pronamic_pay_subscr
wpcode
HomeIndirect TaxesCBI Court Sentences Two in 2003 Duty Drawback Fraud Case, Orders Rs....

CBI Court Sentences Two in 2003 Duty Drawback Fraud Case, Orders Rs. 9 Lakh Compensation to AEPC

Published on

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The CBI Court at Rouse Avenue District Court (RADC), New Delhi sentenced two individuals — Rajender Sharma and Satyapal Singh — in a 2003 case involving fraudulent duty drawback claims amounting to over Rs. 14 lakh. Both were also directed to pay a total compensation of ₹9 lakh to the Apparel Export Promotion Council (AEPC), New Delhi.

The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) had registered the case on December 30, 2003, against Rajender Sharma, proprietor of M/s Siddharthi, and unidentified officials of AEPC, Ministry of Textiles, for allegedly manipulating documents to falsely claim duty drawbacks for non-existent exports of garments. The conspiracy was carried out in collaboration with co-accused Satyapal Singh.

The investigation revealed that Sharma had illegally transferred his export license to another person and fabricated export documents to fraudulently claim duty drawback benefits totaling Rs. 14,01,828. Both Sharma and Singh were chargesheeted by the CBI on June 29, 2005, and subsequently admitted guilt during trial proceedings under plea bargaining.

Following their admission, the court convicted Rajender Sharma and sentenced him to the duration of custody already undergone — 75 days — along with a fine of ₹6,000. Co-accused Satyapal Singh was sentenced to imprisonment till the rising of the court, also with a fine of Rs. 6,000.

In addition to the penal sentences, the court ordered both convicts to jointly pay ₹9 lakh in compensation to AEPC, to be disbursed in three equal installments of ₹3 lakh each within six months from the date of judgment.

Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

Foreign Supplier’s ‘Packing Mistake’ Can’t Explain Undeclared Branded Goods in Import Consignment: CESTAT

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Allahabad, has held that an...

Customs Can’t Reclassify Naphtha as Natural Gasoline Liquid on Inconclusive Lab Reports: CESTAT

The Ahmedabad Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has...

Late Payment Interest on Industrial Gas Supplies Not Taxable as Declared Service: CESTAT

The Ahmedabad Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has...

Service Tax Not Separately Collected Must Be Treated as Included in Consideration: CESTAT Grants Cum-Tax Benefit

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), New Delhi, has held that...

More like this

Foreign Supplier’s ‘Packing Mistake’ Can’t Explain Undeclared Branded Goods in Import Consignment: CESTAT

The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Allahabad, has held that an...

Customs Can’t Reclassify Naphtha as Natural Gasoline Liquid on Inconclusive Lab Reports: CESTAT

The Ahmedabad Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has...

Late Payment Interest on Industrial Gas Supplies Not Taxable as Declared Service: CESTAT

The Ahmedabad Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) has...