2015 (11) TMI 258

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e that same were declared as less than 10 years old - Further contended that penalty should not be imposed on appellant as he has not got any extra financial benefit by misdeclaration. Held That:- It is at the instance of both importers as also the present appellant that year of manufacture would be misdeclared thus penalty imposed on appellant is correct - Restriction of 10 years old was remov .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... as allowed under OGL i.e. without any specific import licence, provided the machines are not more than 10 years old. For machines more than 10 years old, a specific import licence was required. In all the four appeals, old and second hand machineries were imported and these were declared as more than 10 years old. The machines were cleared upon such declarations and details provide in the invoices .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ilability of such machines, was looking for the prospective customers in India and thereafter entering into a deal between the foreign supplier and Indian importer. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that it would be seen from the investigation that the importers were aware of the fact that the machines are 10 years old and hence require specific import licence and it is on their in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ire a specific licence. In order to circumvent the requirement of the law, the appellant in connivance with the respective importer, got misdeclared the age of the machines in invoices and other documents and got it cleared from the customs. Under these circumstances, there was a mala fide intention on the part of the appellant and the penalty under Section 112(b) is correctly imposed on the appel .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... appellant that the year of manufacture would be misdeclared. In view of this factual position, the penalty imposed on the appellant is correct. The fact that later on, the restriction of 10 years old was removed is of no consequence as the appellant has intentionally manipulated the documents so as to circumvent the clutches of the law prevalent at the relevant time. Keeping in view the value of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X