9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (4) TMI 488X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a common order. 2. The relevant facts that arise for consideration are that the appellants are the registered as authorized courier agent under the provisions of Courier Import-Export (Clearance) Regulation, 1998. The appellants filed a bill of entry in Form-IV for the clearances of a consignment, which was declared by sender as documents. The appellants filed said Bill of Entry on their own as they found that the weight of the consignment did not match with the declaration of documents. The said consignment was detained and on examination it was found that the said consignment contained medicines. The consignment was seized, statements of persons and employees were recorded and show cause notice was issued to the appellants for impositi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se notice. Relying upon the various decisions it was submitted that the penalty should not be imposed on appellants under Section 112 as they were not directly involved either in importation or Customs clearances and were not aware of actual contents. They specifically rely on the judgment of the Division Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Killick Air Courier Forwarders Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai as reported at [1998 (97) E.L.T. 182 (Tribunal)]. They also relied upon the judgment of the Hon ble High Court of Madras in the case of B. Lakshmichand v. Government of India [1983 (12) E.L.T. 322 (Mad.)] for the preposition that no specific clause of Section 112 was quoted for imposition of penalty on both the appellant. 4. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ny person, - (a) who, in relation to any goods, does or omits to do any act which act or omission would render such goods liable to confiscation under Section 111, or abets the doing or omission of such an act, or (b) who acquires possession of or is in any way concerned in carrying, removing, depositing, harbouring, keeping, concealing, selling or purchasing, or in any other manner dealing with any goods which he knows or has reason to believe are liable to confiscation under Section 111, shall be liable, - (i) in the case of goods in respect of which any prohibition is in force under this Act or any other law for the time being in force, to a penalty [not exceeding the value of the goods or five thousand rupees], whic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ustoms Act, 1962. 7. In order to come to a conclusion whether the non-invocation of specific clause of Section 112 is fatal to the whole issue, it is to be seen whether the show cause notice which is issued to the appellants lays down the fundamentals for imposition of penalty. In this case it is brought on record that the consignor and the consignee of the said consignment both were non-traceable. The appellant Courier Company is a Authorized Courier Agent under the provisions of Courier Import and Export (Clearance) Regulations, 1998. The appellant courier company should have followed the Rules and Regulations of Courier Import and Export (Clearance) Regulations, 1998. The appellant in this case was required to follow Regulation 13 of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... officer or his subordinates by the use of threat, false accusation, duress or offer of any special inducement or promise of advantage or by the bestowing of any gift or favour or other thing or value; (g) maintain records and accounts in such form and manner as may be directed from time to time by an [Assistant Commissioner of Customs or Deputy Commissioner of Customs] and submit them for inspection to the said Assistant Commissioner of Customs or an officer authohzed by him, wherever required . The provisions of the Regulation 13(c) would very clearly indicate that the appellant was required to exercise to due diligence to ascertain the correctness and the completeness of the information which was submitted by him under Form-IV, bill o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oduce the consignee before the authorities. In view of the facts and circumstances, to my mind the orders of lower authorities for the imposition of penalty under Section 112 cannot be faulted with. 8. As regards imposition of personal penalty on the employee of the company, I find that the employee of the company could not fall category of the person who was having knowledge that the goods which were imported are liable for confiscation as he went on the basis of the manifest of the goods imported and declared by the original forwarding company, the penalty imposed on the employee seems to be harsh and unwarranted. It is also on record that the employee would not benefited by making any mis-declaration in this case and hence the impositi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
