9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (8) TMI 544X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ome present on behalf of the appellant. However, a letter dated 1-8-2001 had been received from the appellant showing his inability to appear due to indisposition, but we find from the record that whenever he put up his appearance earlier, he only requested for adjournment. Therefore, we decline his request for adjournment and proceed to decide the appeal on merits after hearing the learned SDR. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... osed that these bags belonged to one Harbans Singh who brought the same in the truck and he unloaded the same from the truck on the direction of Harbans Singh. 4. During investigation, Harbans Singh, Sandeep Sood, owner of the Transport Company, the present appellant and 9 others named in the impugned order were interrogated. On completion of the investigation show cause notice was served on all ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bearings of foreign origin from the godown premises of Transport Company known as M/s. Rattan Roadlines was not disputed by the present appellant who was at that time working as a Manager of the company. In fact, he brought the goods in a truck and the same were unloaded at his company premises by the driver of that truck, namely Manta. The learned Commissioner has recorded detailed reasons for ho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6-12-2000 passed by the Tribunal. Therefore, the present appellant who at that time was Manager of the company and in whose presence the smuggled goods were recovered from the premises of the company, cannot legally escape his liability under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act. He has been rightly held liable under said section for imposition of penalty by the Commissioner. 8. However, keeping i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
