9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 140X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der-in-Original No.11/COMMR./HKT/2009, dated 30.06.2009 in terms of which, inter alia penalty of Rs. 1.5 lakhs was imposed on the appellant under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962 read with Section 4 of the Antiquities & Art Treasure Act, 1972 in the case of attempted export of 12 terracotta panels mis-declared as gear cutting machine parts. The consignment was booked in the name of M/s. ICI In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd was mainly instrumental in getting the consignment of antiques cleared through Customs by using IE code of some other company and mis-declaring the goods as auto parts. In his statement recorded under Section 108 of Customs Act, 1962, the appellant admitted that Mr. Rajeev Gupta hired him and told him that both would be packing statues (murtiyan) and auto parts that he contacted Mr. Sanjiv Rana ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rana the IE code of some reputed company to be used for export and was involved in packing and transport of goods. He has admitted in his statement about this. He said that freight was in the range of Rs. 90,000/- and the value declared was in the range of Rs. 20,000/- and Shri Nand Ram knew that goods were not auto parts as he was involved in their packing. He said the statement of co-accused are ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gal nature of the goods attempted to be exported and the mis-declaration thereof. In the light of the foregoing analysis, I am of the view that the appellant is guilty of abetment of the attempted to export which attracts penalty under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962. Having regard to the fact and the role played by the appellant in the attempted illegal export and the nature of the impugned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
