2009 (1) TMI 258 - AT - Customs

Export contraband held that - appellant provided facility to store the wooden logs, he arranged an exporter and a CHA to handle the export documentation. He was offered Rs. 50000/- for the work - That the appellant was promised a job in the office of Shri Balaji and others they had planned to open at Tuticorin and the appellant was lured to undertake the job do not indicate anything more than that meets the eye. The offer of a job if the appellant had performed the work entrusted is not unusual. - Moreover, the contraband had been stored at a place 14 kms away from Tuticorin not notified under the Act, or near the coast. A penalty cannot be imposed on a person for abetment on presumption of conscious participation in the offence inviting confiscation of any goods under the Act. In the circumstances, the penalty imposed on Shri Neil Armstrong under Section 114 of the Act cannot be sustained

Summary

The judgement by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, CHENNAI, with citation 2009 (1) TMI 258, involved a penalty imposed on Mr. Neil Armstrong under Section 114 of the Customs Act. The penalty was imposed due to the attempted export of red sander logs under the guise of wooden designed pillars. The appeal was filed by Mr. Neil Armstrong against the penalty.

The case revolved around a series of events where Mr. Neil Armstrong was approached to export red sander logs, which are prohibited goods. He was offered a sum of Rs. 50,000 for the job, arranged for an exporter with IEC Code, a CHA, and a godown for storage. However, the goods were discovered to be red sander logs during a physical verification, and it was found that they were not meant to be exported under the Shipping Bills filed. In his defense, Mr. Neil Armstrong claimed that he had not committed any offense as he had not attempted to take the goods to Tuticorin port for export.

The Commissioner found Mr. Neil Armstrong complicit in the attempted export of contraband, as he had knowingly participated in the smuggling of red sander logs. However, the Appellate Tribunal overturned the penalty, stating that there was no clear evidence of Mr. Neil Armstrong's abetment in the export of contraband. The goods were stored at a location not notified under the Act, and the order did not establish Mr. Neil Armstrong's conscious participation in the offense. Therefore, the penalty imposed under Section 114 of the Act was deemed unsustainable, and the appeal was allowed.

In summary, the judgement highlights the attempted export of red sander logs under false pretenses, the involvement of Mr. Neil Armstrong in arranging the export, and the subsequent penalty imposed and overturned by the Appellate Tribunal due to lack of clear evidence of abetment. The decision emphasizes the importance of establishing conscious participation in offenses before imposing penalties.