9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (6) TMI 242X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8/95 dated 9-5-95. The Public Notice reads as under :- "NOTE 6. Coimbatore Collte. PN No. 8/95, dt. 9-5-1995 In exercise of the powers conferred under Section 45(1) of the Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962), I, A.P. Sudhir, Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, Coimbatore hereby appoint M/s. T.E.A. Lemuir Container Terminals Pvt. Ltd., Tirupur, to be the custodian of Imported goods received in containers at Inland Container Depot, Tirupur and/or transhipped to Inland Container Depot, Tirupur, until these are cleared for home consumption or are warehoused or are transhipped in accordance with the provisions of Chapter VIII of the Act ibid. Similarly, they will also be the custodian of Export Cargo brought into ICD, Tirupur for stuffing, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ect of such goods. The removal of the goods from the ICD back to town was made under proper gate passes. In any case, no mens rea was involved in the said act and, therefore, no penalty was imposable on the appellants under Section 117 ibid. It is also submitted by ld. counsel that there is no provision in the Customs Act governing the handling of export goods in ICDs managed by custodians appointed under Section 45 of the Act, which provision deals with handling of import goods only. Ld. counsel has also challenged the separate penalty imposed on the General Manager under the same provision.(section 117) 3. Ld. SDR, apart from reiterating the findings of the Asst. Commissioner and the Commissioner (Appeals), refers to Public Notice N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... would mean that entry of export goods into the "Customs area" and its exit from the area would be subject to the control of the proper officer of Customs in charge of the area. In the instant case, the removal of the goods to town was, admittedly, made without intimation to the proper officer of Customs, a fact which is evidenced by the gate passes issued by the appellants, which do not bear any endorsement by the proper officer of Customs. This act of the appellants was, obviously, in breach of the custodian's obligation to subject the export goods to the control of the proper officer of Customs in terms of Section 141 ibid. Hence there is nothing wrong in the finding recorded by the original authority that the appellants acted in contrave ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
