2008 (6) TMI 406

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t. [Order per : S.S. Kang, Vice-President]. Heard both sides. 2. The appellant filed this appeal against the imposition of penalty of Rs. Five lakhs under Section 112 of Customs Act. The appellant is a representative of CHA. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the Bill of Entry was filed in respect of imports made from Malaysia. The goods imported are compact fluorescent lamp and .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... aysia exist as mentioned in the invoice. The contention is that the appellants are no way connected with the importer to evade payment of duty. The documents supplied by the importer were submitted to the Custom authorities for the assessment of the goods and there is no evidence that appellant is receiving anything more than due for clearance of the goods in question, therefore, the penalty is no .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... aysia origin whereas verification it was found that there was no firm exist in Malaysia regarding which the invoice for the goods was produced. We find that there is no evidence regarding intention of the appellant to evade payment of duty or his connivance with the importer to file a wrong declaration regarding country of origin. In these circumstances, the penalty imposed on the appellant is not .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X