9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (6) TMI 394X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dvocate appearing for Shri Madan Agrawal pleaded that his client is not in a position to deposit the amount in dispute due to financial constraints. He referred to Para 41 of the Order-in-Original where role of Shri Madan Agrawal is discussed and pleaded that Shri Madan Agrawal was a non-working Director and he was not involved in any other activity of the Company except attending the meeting of the Directors. There is no evidence that he has played any role in relation to violation of the Act. Therefore, the recovery of the penalty may be dispensed with for hearing the appeal. He relied on the decision of Delhi High Court in case of L.P. Desai v. Union of India [2004 (165) E.L.T. 151 (Delhi)], where it was held in Para 11 of the said order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... M/s. Unicorp Industries Ltd. pleaded that the Commissioner has given the findings in Para 39 of his order wherein he has observed that B.B. Gupta was looking after the work related to import like filing of the Bill of Entry, clearance from Customs, procurement/purchases from the foreign supplier in respect of components required for the manufacture of the computers. He pleaded that the activity done by Shri Gupta is not violation of the provisions of the Customs Act and no penalty is imposable on him. He also relied on the following decisions :- (1) Z.U. Alvi. v. CCE, Bhopal [2000 (117) E.L.T. 69 (Tribunal)] Where it was held that an employee of the manufacturer not having any existence independent of manufacturer - Appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Share Department, liaison work with all Government Departments, accounts book and record keeping of the company in their proper maintenance, RBI complaints and other related matters. He stated that Shri V.P. Gupta being an employee of the Company was only looking after the work relating to the banks. He was not concerned with the import and exports and he has not violated any provisions of the Customs Act. Therefore, no penalty is imposable on him. He also pleaded financial hardship and relied on the same decisions as in the case of Shri B.B. Gupta. He, therefore, requested that pre-deposit of the penalty may be dispensed with for hearing the appeals. 6.We have considered the submissions made by the learned Advocates for their respectiv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... valuation of the imported goods. He has signed the minutes of the meetings of all the Board of Directors where decisions were taken, therefore, we find that he cannot claim for waiving of any penalty for abatement. 8.In case of Shri B.B. Gupta, Director of M/s. Unicorp Industries Ltd., we find that Shri B.B. Gupta was getting the goods cleared from the Customs. He was filing all the Bills of Entry where the value of the goods were not correctly shown, therefore, he cannot say that he was not aware of the over-valuation of the goods. Similarly, Shri V.P. Gupta, Company Secretary, who was dealing with all the Government Departments, Banks and Books of Accounts, cannot claim that he was not aware regarding the correct valuation of the goods. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
