2018 (4) TMI 1114 - AT - Customs

Penalty u/s 112 of CA on the customs officer - it was alleged that they had abetted in illicit clearance of goods under seizure without out of charge order - Held that - this Tribunal has considered the allegation against the respondents on the similar investigation and dropped the proceedings in the case of CC, Amritsar Versus Shri Parminder Jit Singh, Inspector and others 2013 (7) TMI 377 - CESTAT NEW DELHI , where it was held that when the disciplinary proceedings against the respondents under CCS (CCA) Rules have been dropped, the proceedings for imposition of penalty against them under Section 112 (a) of Customs Act, 1962 which are based on the same charges and the same evidence, would also not survive. Penalties do not survive - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Allegation of abetment in illicit clearance of goods without payment of duty and customs clearance.
2. Imposition of penalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 on customs officers.
3. Review of penalty proceedings by the Committee of Chief Commissioners.
4. Comparison of penalty proceedings against different officers involved in the case.

Analysis:
The case involved a situation where imported goods were found to have been removed without payment of duty and customs clearance, leading to their seizure. Subsequently, a show cause notice was issued to customs officers, alleging abetment in the illicit clearance of goods. Initially, the penalty proceedings against the officers were dropped by the Commissioner. However, the Committee of Chief Commissioners reviewed this decision and filed appeals against the officers. The Tribunal noted that similar investigations against other department officers had resulted in dropped proceedings. Citing consistency, the Tribunal affirmed the decision to drop charges against the respondents, aligning with its previous rulings on co-noticees in similar cases.

The Tribunal found no flaws in the impugned order and upheld the decision to dismiss the appeals filed by the Revenue. The judgment highlighted the importance of maintaining consistency in penalty proceedings and emphasized the need for fair and just adjudication based on the facts and circumstances of each case. The Tribunal's analysis focused on the legal principles governing penalty imposition under the Customs Act, ensuring that the rights of the officers involved were duly considered and upheld. Ultimately, the judgment served as a precedent for ensuring procedural fairness and adherence to legal standards in penalty proceedings related to customs violations.