9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 446X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... absence of any such evidence, invoking of section 111(g) for confiscation is not in accordance with law. the respondent had informed the adjudicating authority that the revision in bill of lading was made after the filing of the manifest and, therefore, no lapse could be attributed to the agent - It must also be noted that amendments in bills of lading, being documents of title, are to be made only on the original bill of lading; multiple versions of documents of title are unheard of. It is also a document of custodianship and a shipping line cannot issue a bill with a later date owing to implications of responsibility for safe delivery of cargo being alienated for the inter regnum - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - C/1086/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ments in manifests only after the proper officer accords permission and, if the amendment was in the category of major , to be preceded by adjudication for imposition of penalty by obtaining, wherever necessary, waiver of notice and of written defence. 6. Though the cited circular does direct the imposition of penalty, which, itself, borders on impropriety considering that invoking of section 111 and section 112 of Customs Act, 1962 is in exercise of quasi-judicial power that no superior authority can mandate, nay, even influence, it is silent on the statutory provision to be invoked for such penalty. From a perusal of the circular, it appears that the issuing authority was prompted to resort to this deterrent owing to unfavourable d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... loyed on the specific direction rendered by the authority that issued the said circular, imposition of penalty consequent upon setting aside of impugned order is also ruled out. It is also moot whether it would be equitable to remand the matter in the absence of a circumscribing limit to a fresh adjudication by the original authority. It would appear that this entire exercise of review and appeal is of little avail to Revenue as the prayers in the appeal do little to advance their cause. 8. There appears to be a disconnect between the provisions of the statute that are alleged to have been contravened for justifying the confiscation under section 111 (f) and (g) and imposition of penalties under section 112 of Customs Act, 1962. Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... error or be uninformed even if Central Board of Excise Customs abhors such frailty; as to which of the two carries greater authority is certainly not a matter of doubt. No administrative instruction can limit or impede statutory empowerment. The peremptoriness of the instruction in the circular is contrary to law and, to that extent, renders it unenforceable. 10. There is no dispute that the goods were intended for unloading at Mumbai port. Section 32 forbids the unloading of goods at the port for which the goods are not manifested. The purpose of section 30 and section 32 is to ensure that only such goods as are, and can be, cleared from that port on payment of duty alone shall be unloaded. The impugned consignment is not alleged to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
