2009 (7) TMI 884 - SC - Customs

Mis-declarion of value and quantity to evade customs duty - adjudicating authority imposed penalties under Sec. 112(b) of the Customs Act on the ground that respondents were dealing with the goods which were liable for confiscation. It was contended on behalf of the respondents that they were not aware about the nature of the goods Held that - Tribunal found that the case of Pawan Kumar Gupta is guilty under Sec. 112(b) of the Customs Act but on consideration of the totality of the facts and circumstances, the penalty imposed was reduced from 1.5 crores to 5 lakhs, Since he has already been found guilty under Sec. 112(b) of the Customs Act and penalty has also been imposed on him, no interference is called for. appeal filed against Pawan Kumar Gupta is also accordingly dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against penalty imposed under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act 1962 on two respondents - Trilok Nath Mittal and Pawan Kumar Gupta.

Analysis:
The appeals were directed against the judgment and order of the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, where penalties of Rs. 1,50,00,000/- each were imposed under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act 1962. The case involved the import of ball bearings by mis-declaring value and quantity to evade customs duty, with the goods being recovered from the premises of a related entity. A show cause notice was issued to the respondents, and their statements were recorded under Sec. 108, which they later retracted. The adjudicating authority imposed penalties on the grounds that the respondents were involved with goods liable for confiscation, despite their claim of being unaware of the goods' nature.

As for Trilok Nath Mittal, it was found that he never received or dealt with the goods, making him not liable for penalty under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act. The Tribunal held that Trilok Nath Mittal should not pay any penalty, and the penalty imposed by the adjudicating authority was set aside. The Commissioner of Customs appealed this decision, but the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal against Trilok Nath Mittal, deeming it meritless.

Regarding Pawan Kumar Gupta, it was alleged that he was present at the premises where the goods were stored, sorting them out and involved in issuing challans in the name of a bogus firm. The Tribunal differentiated his case from Trilok Nath Mittal's, finding him guilty under Sec. 112(b) of the Customs Act. However, considering the facts and circumstances, the penalty imposed was reduced from 1.5 crores to 5 lakhs. The Court decided not to interfere in Pawan Kumar Gupta's case, dismissing the appeal against him and directing each party to bear their own costs.