9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (11) TMI 180 - AT - CustomsLevy of penalty u/s 117 of the Customs Act, 1962 - Employees of the Customs Broker - connivance in overvaluation of goods imported - HELD THAT - This Bench in M/S. COCHIN AIR CARGO CLEARING HOUSE, M/S. E. KOCHURANI AND M/S. V.A. MARY DAS VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (PREVENTIVE) , TIRUCHIRAPPALLI 2023 (9) TMI 1198 - CESTAT CHENNAI after considering the facts as pleaded by both the sides, has inter alia held that there was no evidence to allege that the appellants therein had connived in any manner, in the overvaluation of the goods imported - it is found that most of the other appellants are the employees of the Customs Broker namely, M/s. Cochin Air Cargo Clearing House, Cochin, including the appellant. Section 117 of the Customs Act, 1962 invites penalty for contravention, etc., of any provision of the Act or abets any such contravention or who fails to comply with any of the provisions of the Act, which was his duty to comply with - A perusal of the impugned order does not point out as to what was expected of the present appellant, being one of innumerable employees of the Customs Broker, as his duty to comply with, which the appellant had failed to perform. Insofar as this appellant is concerned, the Commissioner himself has observed that there was no direct evidence of connivance. There are no justification in the imposition of penalty under Section 117 ibid. on the present appellant in the peculiar facts of this case - appeal allowed.
Issues involved: Imposition of penalty under Section 117 of the Customs Act, 1962 on the appellant.
Summary: Issue 1: Imposition of penalty under Section 117 of the Customs Act, 1962 The appellant was one of the co-noticees against whom a Show Cause Notice was issued. The Commissioner of Customs imposed a penalty under Section 117 on the appellant. Similar penalties were imposed on other co-noticees who had preferred appeals. During the hearing, the appellant did not appear. The Revenue submitted that penalties against other co-noticees had been deleted by a co-ordinate Bench. The Tribunal found that there was no evidence of connivance by the appellant in the overvaluation of imported goods. The adjudicating authority observed that the appellant did not have direct connivance with the exporter. The Tribunal held that there was no evidence of connivance by the appellant in the subject export. Section 117 of the Customs Act invites penalty for contravention or failure to comply with any provision of the Act. The Tribunal found no justification for imposing a penalty on the appellant and set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal. (Order pronounced in the open court on 03.11.2023)
|
