9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (9) TMI 509X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... charge of violating the provisions of Customs Act would arise only when somebody files a bill of entry for import of the goods and claims himself to be the importer - violating the provisions of Section 111 (m) would not arise at all - the appellant did not had any IEC code at the time of importation - lending of IEC code to anyone else also would not arise – there could not be any violation of R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ate. However, neither the appellant nor anyone filed any bill of entry or claimed to be the importer of the goods. Nevertheless, since the documents received shows the appellant as the consignee, action was initiated. The investigating agency, DRI recorded a statement of the appellant wherein the appellant confirmed that they had not imported the said consignment and had also written a letter to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not want the said goods. He further submitted that at the time of importation they did not have any IEC code and therefore, misusing of IEC, code by the appellant or any other person does not arise. Accordingly, he prays for setting aside the penalty imposed on them. 5. The Ld. AR appearing for the revenue submits that as per investigation conducted, the appellant had initially consented for imp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly there cannot be any violation of Rules 7 11 of the Foreign Trade (Regulations) Rules attracting the provisions of Section 111 (d) of the Customs Act. 6.2 We do not understand how in such a scenario can the Customs authorities proceed against the appellant and impose penalty when no cause of action has arisen. The said action is clearly unsustainable in law. Accordingly, we set aside the imp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
