9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (7) TMI 220X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ined Sony Brand Button Cells and Battery Cells. The value was misdeclared by the appellant as per the DRI investigation. Various statements were recorded and show-cause notice was issued. Show-cause notice dated 7.7.1999 was issued to the appellant directing him to show cause as to why penalty action should not be taken against him under the provisions of Sec.114 A of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellant took defence before the adjudicating authority that the goods have not been imported by him but he was only assisting the importer. His defence has not been accepted by the adjudicating authority and the adjudicating authority imposed a penalty of Rs. One lakh under the provisions of Sec.112 of the Customs Act, 1962. 3. The ld.couns ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for short-levy or non-levy of duty in certain cases. - Where the duty has not been levied or has been short-levied or the interest has not been charged or paid or has been part paid or the duty or interest has been erroneously refunded by reason of collusion or any wilful mis-statement or suppression of facts, the person who is liable to pay the duty or interest, as the case may be, as determined under sub-section (2) of section 28 shall also be liable to pay a penalty equal to the duty or interest so determined :[Provided that where such duty or interest, as the case may be, as determined under sub-section (2) of section 28, and the interest payable thereon under section 28AB, is paid within thirty days from the date of the communication ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r penalty. The goods are also liable for confiscation as there is misdeclaration of value . 10. It can be seen from the reproduced findings that the adjudicating authority has held M/s. Usha Trading Company as the importer. If that be so, the penalty imposed on the current appellant under Sec,112 is unwarranted as this section was not invoked in the show-cause notice issued to the appellant. In the absence of any such invocation or liability for confiscation of the goods on the appellant, as he is not the importer, we are of the view that the penalty imposed on the appellant is unsustainable and is liable to be set aside. The impugned order to the extent of penalty imposed on the appellant is set aside and the appeal is allowed. &nb ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
