9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (12) TMI 371X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation No. 53/97-Cus., dated 3-6-97 under which they were exempted from customs duty subject to fulfilment of certain conditions. They imported 16 consignments of lubricant oil without payment of duty on the basis of 19 forged certificates in the form of Annexure-A on which their Commercial Executive had made forged signatures of the Range officer. The certificate in the form of Annexure-A was required under Circular No. 14/98-Cus., dated 10-3-98. They had also not executed the requisite Bond at the time of import of the goods. The offence was booked against the respondent for illegal import of the goods on forged documents without complying the conditions of the Notification No. 53/97-Cus., dated 3-6-97. However, a penalty of Rs. 10,000/- o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... use issued a Trade Notice that new Bond should be executed in place of the old bonds. In terms of Board s circular of March, 1998 the respondent filed a bond for acceptance with the Superintendent which was under some objection. In the meantime, the goods of the respondents reached the port and they wanted clearance to avoid demurrage. It was found by the Commissioner (Appeals) that the goods were cleared under valid bonds executed by them earlier and the goods were accounted for in the records of the respondents and the certificates of rewarehousing were issued. The invalid documents on which the goods were cleared is not the issue before me as that issue was earlier decided by the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) and the Department has ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reported in 2004 (173) E.L.T. 185 (Tribunal-Mumbai), the Tribunal has held that act of employee not proved to be permitted by the company-policy or the Director are beyond the terms of employment for which neither the company nor its Director could be liable for penalty. It was pleaded that since in the present case. Shri Telegaonkar has himself forged the documents to show his efficiency without intimating the senior officers of the company and this act of Shri Telegaonkar is beyond the terms of employment and the company has not directed him to prepare the forged documents, therefore the penalty should not be imposed on the company. 5. I have considered the submissions made by both the sides. I find that in this case, Shri Telegaonkar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
