9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (1) TMI 278 - AT - CustomsImposition of penalty u/s 112(b) of the Customs Act 1962 on Moongipa Roadways Pvt. Ltd. and Jabee also they have not controverted the statement of Shri Vijay Bhuwania the mastermind who had stated that the CHA was aware of the entire exercise of diversion of the goods. We do not find any reason to interfere in the order of the adjudicating authority. Penalty upheld - appeal rejected - decided against appellant.
Issues:
Appeal against penalties imposed under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962 for aiding and abetting improper imports. Analysis: The appeals arose from penalties imposed by the adjudicating authority under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. The first appellant, Moongipa Roadways Pvt. Ltd., argued that they acted in good faith and were not aware of the goods being liable for confiscation. However, the tribunal found that the charges against them were valid. The manager of their godown admitted to the unauthorized presence of the imported goods, which were supposed to be in bond movement to Kolkata. Despite claims of following instructions, the tribunal noted that the goods were loaded for Kolkata, but later found in the godown with broken Customs seals, without a satisfactory explanation. Consequently, the tribunal held that Moongipa Roadways Pvt. Ltd. had no valid defense. Regarding the second appellant, Jabee & Co., the Customs House Agent (CHA), they were found to have mentioned the wrong recipient on the lorry challan, indicating awareness of the diversion of goods. The tribunal observed that as experienced CHAs, they should have known the correct procedures for goods in bond movement. Additionally, a statement from the mastermind of the diversion implicated the CHA in the scheme. Consequently, the tribunal upheld the adjudicating authority's decision regarding Jabee & Co., finding no grounds for interference. In conclusion, the tribunal affirmed the correctness and legality of the impugned order, upholding the penalties imposed under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962. The appeals were rejected, and the judgment was pronounced on 19.12.2016.
|
