2000 (9) TMI 507 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Imposition of penalties by the Commissioner of Customs, Calcutta on various appellants.
2. Role and liability of Custom House Agents in clearance of goods.
3. Liability of buyers of impugned goods.
4. Liability of transporters of goods.

Analysis:

1. The Commissioner of Customs, Calcutta imposed penalties on various appellants along with confiscation of goods imported by M/s. RSI Engg. (P) Ltd. The Tribunal heard arguments from representatives of the appellants and the Respondent. The Tribunal found that M/s. RSI Engg. (P) Ltd. did not file an appeal, absolving them from the Tribunal's orders regarding the confiscation and penalties. The Tribunal proceeded to consider the arguments presented by the representatives of the appellants.

2. Regarding M/s. M. Dutta Agency and its partner, Shri Mukti Pd. Dutta, who were Custom House Agents, it was argued that their role was limited to the clearance of goods for M/s. RSI. The representatives contended that the appellants did not contravene any Customs Law provisions and should not be penalized. The Tribunal agreed with the arguments presented and waived the penalties imposed on M/s. M. Dutta Agency and Shri Mukti Pd. Dutta.

3. The liability of M/s. Plastic Concern and its partner, Shri Anand Damani, as buyers of the impugned goods was also questioned. The representatives argued that they were not involved in the non-fulfillment of export obligations and had purchased the goods in good faith. The Tribunal found no evidence linking the goods received by M/s. Plastic Concern to the imported goods under dispute, thereby setting aside the penalties imposed on them.

4. The liability of M/s. Raipur Calcutta Road Carriers and the owner of the truck in transporting the goods was also examined. The representatives argued that they were unaware of any Customs law contraventions by the importers and had merely provided transportation services. The Tribunal found no evidence implicating the transporters in any wrongdoing and deemed the penalties imposed on them unjustified.

5. After careful consideration of the impugned order and the arguments presented, the Tribunal set aside the penalties imposed on all the appellants. The Tribunal allowed all the appeals, providing consequential relief to the appellants based on the discussions and findings presented in the judgment.