9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 413X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and has received non-duty paid goods. Admittedly, such statement of Shri Charley being the statement of co-accused cannot be admitted for evidence without any corroboration to that effect. This law is well settled and does not require support of any precedent decision. There being no other evidence on record to show that the non-duty paid clearances from the port area by Shri Charley were with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the reasons for imposing penalty upon the said applicant, we reproduce the relevant paragraphs from the impugned order. 130. Show Cause Notice proposes that penalty under Section 112(a) may be imposed on Shri C.K. Sunny. It has been admitted by Shri C.K. Sunny in his statement that he had purchased the CFLs, which were clandestinely removed from the Port without payment of duty. It is a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rit. 132. As per Section 112(a) of Customs Act 1962, any person, who in relation to the goods does or omits to do any act rendering the goods liable for confiscation was liable for penalty. It is established that Shri Sunny actions in respect of the 40500 CFLs collectively valued ₹ 5,00,000/- have rendered them liable for confiscation. I therefore hold that Shri Sunny is liable for pen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ods were actually imported by Shri Charley and were cleared without payment of duty. Various statements of the appellant only reveal that the goods were supplied to him by Shri Charley. It is only Shri Charley who gave the statement to the effect that the appellant Shri Sunny was knowing about the imports and has received non-duty paid goods. Admittedly, such statement of Shri Charley being ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
