9911796707
|
Home
The appellate tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai, under the guidance of Shri P.G. Chacko, J., heard an appeal from the department seeking penalties under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act against M/s. Jai Krishan Liquors P. Ltd., Shri Ashok Wadia, and Shri Satya Prakash Bagla. The case involved the importation of a Toyota Land Cruiser by Ms. Reshma Ali Asghar, who claimed clearance under the Transfer of Residence Rules. The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence later issued a show-cause notice proposing confiscation of the car and penalties under Sections 111(d), (m), and (o) of the Customs Act. The Commissioner of Customs (Import) ordered the confiscation of the vehicle, imposed fines on the owner, and penalties on the importer. A Committee of Chief Commissioners of Customs reviewed the decision, leading to the department's appeal for penalties on the respondents.
The department argued that Shri Ashok Wadia, as the Managing Director of the buyer-company, was aware of the car's manufacture year and its ineligibility for TR Rules benefits. Shri Ashok Wadia's admission of this fact and willingness to pay penalties under Section 112(b) were highlighted. The tribunal acknowledged the car's improper importation and the penalties imposed on the owner and importer. It found Shri Ashok Wadia personally liable for penalties under Section 112(b) due to his involvement in the acquisition of the car, but not the buyer-company. The appeal was partially allowed, with Shri Ashok Wadia held liable for penalties and the case remanded for penalty determination. The broker, Shri Satya Prakash Bagla, was deemed not liable for penalties as he was engaged in post-importation activities without knowledge of the car's confiscation liability. The appeal was limited to Shri Ashok Wadia's liability under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act. The tribunal directed the lower authority to decide the penalty amount in this case.
|
