Full Judgment
The penalty has been imposed on the applicant on the ground that he was concerned with exporting quantities of masoor dal misdeclared to be partially oriented yarn.
2. Counsel for the applicant says that there is no basis for the Commissioner's conclusion. The statements of Chhotalal Hirji Mamania and Makrand A. Bhaskar do not implicate the applicant at all. The applicant was a broker in the transaction between Rajeev Pathak and Excel International with regard to sale of POY manufactured by the latter and that is why his bank account had been made use of by these person.
3. The department representative points out that the commissioner has relied upon the statement of the applicant himself, admitting his involvement in the loading of masoor dal in the export containers which were stated to contain yarn. he points out that eh counsel for the applicant is not able to substantiate his contention that the applicant retracted the admissions made in his statement within a day or two.
4. We take note of this point. We also not that it is not a ground in the appeal that the applicant did not make the admissions in the statement that the Commissioner finds that he has made. On this prima facie view we direct deposit by the applicant of Rs. 10 lakhs within two months from today. Thereupon we waive deposit of remaining amount of penalty.