9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (8) TMI 570X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... indicated below: SN Name of Applicant-Assessee Penalty under Section 114(i) of Customs Act, 1962 Penalty under Section 112(b) of Customs Act, 1962 1 M/s Dadi Impex Pvt Ltd Rs. 1.50 Crores Rs. 1.50 Crores 2 Shri Anand Prakash Chaudhary Rs. 1.50 Crores Rs. 1.50 Crores 3 M/s Maruti Seeds & Fertilizers Rs. 75 Lakhs Rs. 75 Lakhs 4 Shri Shyam C. Ghelani Rs. 75 Lakhs Rs. 75 Lakhs 5 M/s Dinesh Agro Sales Rs. 30 Lakhs Rs. 30 Lakhs 6 M/s Sharad Agro Centre Rs. 20 Lakhs Rs. 20 Lakhs 7 M/s Poshak Fertilizers Rs. 7.5 Lakhs Rs. 7.5 Lakhs 8 M/s Sardar Kheti Vikas Kendra Rs. 7.5 Lakhs Rs. 7.5 Lakhs 9 Shri Ramkrishna B. Mehta Rs. 75 Lakhs Rs. 75 Lakhs 10 Shri Kamal Inderraj Gurnani Rs. 75 Lakhs Rs. 75 Lakhs 11 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ods were to be exported. 3.2 Ld. Counsel Shri Dhaval K. Shah, appearing on behalf of M/s Poshak Fertilizers submits that they are the distributor of Potash and have purchased the potash from M/s Indian Potash Ltd and sold it to further dealers as per the provisions of Fertilizers Act and rules made there under and were not aware that the goods will be diverted down the line by the dealer/purchaser. 3.3 Ld. Counsel Shri P.V. Sheth submits that the appellant Shri Brijesh H. Advani is an employee and could not know for what reason the goods are imported and was not aware that MOP was, in fact, being exported in the guise of Industrial Salt. 3.4 Ld. Counsel Shri D.K. Trivedi, appears for M/s Maruti Seeds & Fertilizers and Shri Shyam C. Ghela ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Walia and submit that as a CHA, they should not be visited with penalty as they have filed the documents as was required under the Customs Act and were not aware that MOP is being exported in the guise of Industrial Salt. 4. Ld. D.R. submits that all the appellants herein should be put to some condition as held by this Bench is Stay Order dated.21.11.2012, as the issue involved in these cases is identical to the issue therein. 5. We have considered the submissions made at length by both sides and perused the records. 6. We find that the allegations against M/s Indian Potash Ltd, prima facie, seems to be incorrect as M/s Indian Potash Ltd has produced records of proper accounting of imported fertilizers and sale thereof to the persons w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tions. Accordingly, these two stay petitions are dismissed as not maintainable. 7.3 This takes us to the various other persons on whom the penalties have been imposed by adjudicating authority under Section 112(b) and Section 114(i) of Customs Act, 1962. 7.4 As regards penalty imposed under Section 112(b) of Customs Act, 1962, none of the appellants herein had imported the goods. The appellants herein were charged for export of MOP in the guise of Industrial Salt. Accordingly, we find that the penalties imposed under Section 112(b) of Customs Act, 1962, by any stretch of imagination, cannot be fastened on all the appellants. Accordingly, the applications for waiver of pre-deposit of amounts of penalties imposed under Section 112(b) of Cus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
