2016 (2) TMI 540 - AT - Customs

Levy of personal penalty against CA and appraiser for abetment in mis-declaration of export goods to avail wrong DEPB credit - Held that - Revenue failed to prove the active involvement of CA and therefore no penalty could be levied. - However, the allegation against Shri A.K. Kaul (Appraiser) that he was actively involved in the fraudulent activity proved, therefore, leniency cannot be taken against him.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Imposition of penalty on Shri Pavitar Singh.
2. Imposition of penalty on Shri A.K. Kaul (Appraiser).
3. Imposition of penalty on Shri Sada Ram (Deputy Commissioner).

Detailed Analysis:

1. Imposition of Penalty on Shri Pavitar Singh:
The Tribunal reviewed the case of Shri Pavitar Singh, who was previously exonerated in a similar investigation (2012-TIOL-1269-CESTAT-DEL). The Tribunal noted that the evidence against Pavitar Singh was primarily based on statements by co-accused, which lacked independent corroboration. The investigation by CBI also did not substantiate any criminal mens rea against him. The Tribunal found that Pavitar Singh was merely performing his professional duties as a Chartered Accountant and was not involved in the fraudulent activities. Consequently, the penalty imposed on Shri Pavitar Singh was set aside, and his appeal was allowed.

2. Imposition of Penalty on Shri A.K. Kaul (Appraiser):
The Tribunal found that the signatures of Shri A.K. Kaul appeared on both the shipping bills for crank shafts and timing shafts, which were alleged to be forged. Shri A.K. Kaul conceded that he had no defense against the charges. The Tribunal concluded that Shri A.K. Kaul was actively involved in the fraudulent activities and upheld the penalties imposed by the Adjudicating Authority. Consequently, his appeal was dismissed.

3. Imposition of Penalty on Shri Sada Ram (Deputy Commissioner):
The Tribunal observed that Shri Sada Ram's role was limited to verifying the shipping bills presented before him, which he found to be correct in terms of classification and valuation. There was no evidence to suggest that he was aware of the fraudulent substitution of shipping bills. The Tribunal concluded that the malafides of Shri Sada Ram were not proven, and thus, the penalty imposed on him was set aside. Consequently, his appeal was allowed.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal allowed the appeal of Shri Pavitar Singh, setting aside the penalty imposed on him. The appeal of Shri A.K. Kaul was dismissed, upholding the penalties imposed. The appeal of Shri Sada Ram was allowed, setting aside the penalty imposed on him. The appeals were disposed of accordingly.