9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (1) TMI 439X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... export, he cannot be visited with a penalty under section 114(i) of the Act. - C/221-222/2004 - 668-669/2010 - Dated:- 20-1-2010 - S/Shri M.V. Ravindran, Member (J) and P. Karthikeyan, Member (T) REPRESENTED BY: Shri B. Venugopal, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri S.K. Choudhary, Special Counsel, for the Respondent. [Order per: M.V. Ravindran, Member (J)]. - These two appeals are directed against the Orders-in-Original No. 11/2004-Cus dated 31-3-2004 No. 11/2004-Cus., dated 31-3-2004 vide which the adjudicating authority has imposed a penalties of Rs. 20 lakhs and Rs. 25 lakhs on the proprietor Shri V.K. Singh of M/s. Global Airfreight. 2. The brief facts that arise for consideration are that the appellant is a Customs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llant is recorded in para 35.2 and 35.3 of the Order-in-Original. After taking us through the said findings, he submits that the adjudicating authority has not put forth any evidence that the appellant herein had mala fide intention and had abetted the fraudulent exports if any, done by other persons. He would submit that the imposition of penalty under Section 114 cannot be imposed upon appellant unless there is a positive role attributable to the appellant herein. It is also his submission that the appellant herein is the only person who had contested the show cause notice before the adjudicating authority and has been contesting the same before the Tribunal also. 4. Ld. Shri S.K. Choudhary, Special Counsel appearing for the Revenue has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... allegations made in the show cause notice and submissions made by Shri V.K. Singh, CHA. It is a fact that ihe ex porter approached Shri V.K. Singh, CHA for customs house agent lervices and Shri V.K. Singh in turn got the shipping bills filed by Shri C.S. Satyapal Reddy, another CHA. This has also been accepted by Shri V.K. Singh in his statement dated 13-1-2001. He in fact provided the details of transport of material from M/s. Apar Pharma, based on which further investigation was done. Shri C. Satyapal Reddy in hi statements dated 11-1-2001 and 31-1- 2001 stated that he signed the shipping bills at the behest of Shri V.K. Singh and he did not attend to the clearances. This clearly proves that Shri V.K. Sihgh played crucial role in the expo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... adjudicating authority revolves around on the fact, that appellant has passed on the signing of the shipping bills to one Shri C. Satyapal Reddy, Proprietor of M/s. CSR International and hence he could be aware of the fraud. To our mind these findings do not carry the case of the Revenue any further. In order to impose a penalty under Section 114(i) of the Customs Act, 1962, it is imperative that the role played by the person should be brought out clearly. On the contrary, on the reading of the findings recorded by the adjudicating authority, it can be noted that the appellant had never participated in the export of the goods or the clearances of the same, having handed over the responsibility to someone else. If that be so, there cannot be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
