9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 713X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsignment, there is no evidence on record, same cannot be confiscated. When this finding has been made by the Adjudicating Authority and same has been accepted by the department. In these circumstances, no penalty is warranted against the appellant as the appellant is not importer (as no bill of entry is filed), no inculpatory statement is recorded for the impugned consignment and the provisions of Section 138B of the Act were not followed - Decided in favour of assessee. - C/30/2005-Mum - Final Order No. A/347/2014-WZB/C-IV(SMB) - Dated:- 30-1-2014 - Shri Ashok Jindal, Member (J) Shri S.N. Kantawala, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri M.S. Reddy, DC, (AR), for the Respondent. ORDER The appellant (Shri Narendra B. Jain) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... body else. He further submits that there is no inculpatory statement has been recorded regarding the import of the impugned consignment. It is also submitted that during the course of adjudication, the cross-examination of co-noticees were asked (whose statement were relied by the Adjudicating Authority during the course of proceedings) but no cross-examination was allowed to the appellant. He further submits that for the consignment imported earlier were held by the Adjudicating Authority not liable for confiscation. Therefore, in these circumstances, penalty under Section 112A of the Customs Act, 1962 is not warranted. To support his contention, he relied on the decision of Ashwin S. Mehta - 2006 (197) E.L.T. 386 (Tri.-Mum.) and Basudev G ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... atam without informing to Shri Narendra B. Jain. In the statement of Shri Narendra B. Jain there is no admission by the appellant that he was having any knowledge of the import of the impugned consignment. When Shri Sujit B. Satam himself is stating that this consignment was sent without any knowledge of Shri Narendra B. Jain and Shri Narendra B. Jain was not having knowledge of the import of the consignment, and same has been admitted by Shri Narendra B. Jain that he has no knowledge of the import of the consignment, in these circumstances, the facts are totally different from the case-laws relied upon by the ld. AR. In fact in this case when Shri Narendra B. Jain asked for cross-examination of Shri Sujit B. Satam, whose statement was reli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
