9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 683X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and could not establish the innocence of the appellant. Therefore, the imposition of penalty on the appellant is justified - the imposition of penalty upon the appellant is upheld subject to the amount of the penalty is reduced to ₹ 15,00,000/- - decided partly in favor of appellant. - Appeal No. Cus/75033/2016 - Order No. FO/A/77307/2017 - Dated:- 31-8-2017 - Shri P. K. Choudhary, Hon ble Judicial Member Shri. Sudhir Kumar Mehta, Advocate for the Petitioner Shri S. Das Gupta, D.C. (AR) for the Respondent ORDER Per Shri P. K. Choudhary The facts of the case in brief are that on 08.07.2014, the officers of the New Market Police Station seized a sealed container loaded on a trailer. By order of the Ld. Chief Met ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ansport of Goods Act, 1993. On 26.06.2014, the representative of the appellant informed that the container and the vehicle are not traceable. Immediately on 28.06.2014, the appellant lodged a complaint at Raipur Police Station. Further, the appellant by letter dated 01.07.2014, revoked the authority of CHA and also informed the Customs authorities. 3. It is further stated that the appellant have taken all reasonable steps to the extent to inform the Customs authorities about the missing container hence, no penal provisions can be invoked against the appellant. The Ld. A.R. re-iterates the findings of the Adjudicating Authority. 4. For the proper appreciation of the case, the findings of the Adjudicating Authority in respect of imposit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... portance. I hold them guilty of commission and omission in this attempted illegal export. The foreign exchange received as the advance payment for the purported export, excise duty, sales tax etc. is also to be duly taken care of. In view of the above facts and act of omission and / or commission, which have rendered the goods liable for confiscation under Section 113 of Customs Act, 1962, Shri Vivek Bansal has made himself liable to penal action under Section 114 (i) of the Customs Act, 1962. 5. The main argument of the appellant is that they have informed the Police and the Customs authorities regarding the missing of the container. On the other hand, the finding of the Adjudicating Authority is that the appellant made the transactio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
