9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (2) TMI 1354X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arrival of the said vessel on 9-12-2006, the quantity was found to be excessive and subsequently after proper verification, it was found to be 15,800 ltrs on board the vessel. Tindel, in his statement, on 9-12-2006 admitted excess quantity. After seizure of undeclared diesel oil and the vessel, the owner vide application dated 11-12-2006 requested for release of diesel so that the export goods destined for Kharjuber could be loaded. Accordingly, the provisional release was allowed on 13-12-2006 and IGM was also allowed to be amended. Thereafter, show cause notice was issued and the impugned order has been passed wherein the seized diesel has been confiscated and a fine of ₹ 20,000/- in lieu of confiscation has been imposed. Further, 5 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ded to facilitate export and also in view of the fact that vessel itself had been provisionally released. Since the diesel could not have been taken out from the tanker, the IGM amendment had to be necessarily allowed. In this case, under the facts and circumstances, it cannot be said that the fact that IGM was allowed to be amended, no offence was committed as regards diesel which was not declared in the IGM. 4. Further, I have also noticed that the Tindel, in his statement, had given elaborate details of diesel used from 10-11-2006 and diesel filled in the bunker upto the date of arrival of the vessel. He had given the details of diesel loading and consumption etc. from 10-11-2006 till the date of arrival. Therefore, the contention tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... el in the vessel and the declaration in the IGM was a bona fide mistake. In this case, IGM filed was pre-arrival IGM and was filed by agent. The agent could not have filed IGM without ascertaining the quantum from the master or owner. In this case, it is not known who exactly the agent had consulted while filing the IGM. No statement of agent has been recorded. Since it is normally the master of the vessel on whose behalf, IGM is filed and obligation to file IGM is on the master of the vessel, in absence of any evidence to the contrary, the obvious conclusion would be that the IGM was filed as per the advice of Tindel. 6. I have already discussed and held that it cannot be said that the Tindel was illiterate and therefore he did not know ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cation of the vessel, the learned advocate submitted that the owner of the vessel was not aware of the non-declaration of diesel. The learned Commissioner, in his order, while discussing the issue, has noted that 128 barrels of diesel oil were loaded at Dubai by agent Shri Amad on the instructions of the owner of the vessel. This shows that when the diesel was to be filled in the bunkers of the vessel, the owner used to instruct agent for this purpose. This would mean that the owner was keeping track of the quantum of diesel in the tank from time to time. If that be so, it is difficult to believe that the owner was not aware of mis-declaration. Further, according to the Section 115(2) of the Customs Act, 1962, any conveyance used as a means ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
