9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (11) TMI 431X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... there was no ground to conclude that the situation in hand calls for an order against the Managing Director under Section 112 of the Act, imposes penalty on the writ petitioner as the Managing Director of the company - O.P. No. 7403 of 2003(F), - - - Dated:- 2-11-2007 - Thottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J. Shri A.M. Shaffique, Counsel for the Petitioner. Shri P.S. Sreedharan Pillai, SCGSC, for the Respondent. [Judgment]. C.R. : The petitioner was the managing director of a company, which had set up a unit in the Cochin Export Processing Zone for manufacture of certain equipments for cent percent export. On the basis of the relevant notifications, the company was entitled to import capital goods and claim benefit of duty exe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... carried an appeal before the Customs Excise Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench. That has been dismissed as per the impugned Ext. P3 final order [2002 (145) E.L.T. 481 (Tri. - Bang.)]. 5. Before me, there is no serious challenge to the orders, in so far as they result in confiscation. However, the learned counsel for the petitioner argued that imposition of penalty under Section 112 of the Act by the Commissioner and the appellate decision confirming the same, have been made stating no reasons whatsoever and that, therefore, the impugned orders, to that extent, are cryptic. He further argued that the imposition of penalty under Section 112 of the Act referable to a situation under Section 111(o) could necessarily be on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d with penalty, unless it is shown that he had, by his commissions or omissions, led the goods to be liable for confiscation. 7. The Commissioner, in Ext. P1 order, found that the writ petitioner was in control of the affairs of the company while the other directors were not. Taking that finding on its face value, when we move on to sub-clause (ii) of clause (a) of Section 112, the liability to penalty has to be determined on the basis of duties sought to be evaded. Therefore, the jurisdictional fact to impose a penalty in terms of Section 112(a)(ii) includes the essential ingredient that duty was sought to be evaded . Being a penal provision, it requires to be strictly construed. Evade means, to escape, slip away, to escape or avoid a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
