9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 967X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the part of the appellant i.e. any act of omission or commission which render goods liable for confiscation or act of aiding or abetting with which undue benefit of drawback was sought to be taken - Decided in favour of assessee. - C/136 and 203/2004 - Final Order Nos. A/1380-1381/2013-WZB/C-I(CSTB) - Dated:- 19-6-2013 - Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (J) and S.K. Gaule, Member (T) Shri S.N. Kan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Therefore proceedings were initiated against the exporter and the present appellants in which the goods were allowed to be taken back to town after payment of redemption fine of ₹ 1,00,000/- and penalty on the exporter of ₹ 7 lakh (which are not the subject matter of the appeal) and penalty of ₹ 50,000/- on appellant no. 1 (CHA) and penalty of ₹ 10,000/- on appellant no. 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Ld. AR reiterates the finding of the ld. Commissioner. 6. We have carefully considered the submission. Undisputedly, the goods were allowed to be taken back to town on payment of redemption fine. The allegation against the appellant is that since the exporter was poor and ordinary person who was not having capability and capacity to export such a huge consignment the appellant should have take ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act, whichever is the greater. 6.1 Penalties have been imposed against the appellant on the ground that they failed to bring out to the notice of the department about the exporter. However, we find that department failed to prove any of the ingredient of Section 114(iii) on the part of the appellant i.e. any act of omission or commission which render goods liable for confiscation or act of aidi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
