9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 117X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ouse agents’ that enabled the ostensible importer to avail exemption from duty on the goods that were imported. The link between the appellant and the imported goods has been clearly established in the impugned order. The penal provision does not require a direct and proximate contact with the offending goods. A link is sufficient. That is established in the impugned order. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - C/1132/2005 - A/87972/17/CB - Dated:- 12-6-2017 - Shri M V Ravindran, Member (Judicial) And Shri C J Mathew, Member (Technical) Shri G B Yadav, Advocate, for Appellant Shri M K Mall, Assistant Commissioner (AR), for Respondent ORDER Per: C J Mathew Impugned order-in-original no.73/2005 dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Foreign Trade Policy with obligation to export about 150 metric tons of brass artware valued at ₹ 1,43,60,894. This export obligation was declared to have been fulfilled vide eight shipping bills filed between 24th January 2003 and 16 th March 2003 and on application by the license holder, M/s MM Overseas, the condition of bond and bank guarantee attached to the said licences were waived by the licensing authority. 3. Investigations by Directorate of Revenue Intelligence revealed that these eight shipping bills had been fabricated for submission to the licensing authority to enable duty-free import without any further monitoring by customs authorities. An elaborate scheme had been implemented to pass off the shipping bills a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lhi. While we take note of these decisions, we do not think that they would advance the claim of the appellant as the material circumstances vary. In specific instances, the Tribunal and High Courts may have afforded relief to individuals who are subject to penalties. That, however, does not interpret the law relating to imposition of penalties. Section 112 of Customs Act, 1962 prescribes the imposition of penalty for any act that may, directly or indirectly, have contributed to the confiscation of the goods. The acts of omission or commission that may have had a direct or indirect bearing upon the clearance of import goods is, undoubtedly, based on determination of facts. 6. The findings in the impugned order that the appellant had conc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
