9911796707
TMI Blog1983 (6) TMI 194X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at 10 K.P.D. on 27-10-1977 some contents of the packages covered by Bill of Entry No. DI 725, dated 17-12-1977 were found short. The appellants, who are the Steamer Agents, were called upon to show cause as to why penalty should not be imposed on the shortlanded goods. After hearing the appellants, the Asstt. Collector, M.C.D. imposed a penalty of ₹ 6,100/- under Section 116 of the Customs Act, 1962. Being aggrieved by the order of the Asstt. Collector, the appellants preferred an appeal before the Appellate Collector unsuccessfully and thereafter, they filed a Revision Petition under Section 131 of the Customs Act (Unamended) to the Central Government and the said revision application statutorily stood transferred to this Tribunal. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... after a period of one and a half months. Till then the goods were lying in the part premises. There is no positive evidence that there was no scope for pilferage during that long interval viz., the date of landing of the cargo and the date of the insurance survey. The Public Notice No. 132 issued by the Custom House require the Clearing Agents to have the goods landed under a qualified receipt i.e., in unsound condition, surveyed by the Steamer Agents immediately after their landing from the vessel in order to establish that the shortages took place before the landing of the goods. Admittedly such survey was not done. 7. The interpretation of the Appellate Collector that Public Notice No. 132 did not supersede Public Notice No. 81 in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Customs Act, 1962. On adjudication, the Asstt. Collector imposed a penalty upon the petitioner under Section 116 of the Customs Act, 1962. It was contended by the petitioners before the High Court that the insurance survey was held long after the discharge of the cargo and the provisions of the Public Notice No. 132 had not been complied with. The Hon ble Judge held that since the survey was held long after the discharge of the goods, and the goods had remained in the custody of the Port Trust which were the approved (by the Collector of Customs) authorities for keeping custody of the cargo in terms of Section 45 of the Customs Act, 1962, the penalty order on the steamer agents was illegal and, therefore, it set aside the penalty order. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
