9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 1641X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... such and the same is not tenable - Held that: - it is evident that the M/s.IOCL sold the goods to BPCL in compliance of the conditions of the Notification. It is noted that M/s.IOCL had already paid the duty, which was appropriated by the adjudicating authority. In such situation, the imposition of penalty on the appellant is in my view, unjustified - penalties set aside - appeal allowed - decided ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by Oil Coordination Committee. At the time of such removal of SKO, duty was paid availing the notification for ultimate supply through PDS distributor. BPCL was fully aware of the purpose of import of SKO, handed over to them in line with OCL directives for ultimate sale through PDS. I.O.C. is a major canalising agent as per the policy of the Govt. of India and the goods handed over to BPCL was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on behalf of the appellant made the Bench go through para 35 of the Order-in-Original wherein the Ld. Commissioner has observed that: therefore it is a fact on record that BPCL was aware that the subject SKO consignment were cleared without payment of Customs duty under the said Customs exemption notification and the benefit of exemption of duty was extended on the condition that the goods we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ny argued that on the basis of the admitted facts, BPCL is solely responsible for payment of duty and any interest thereof and any penalty in this regard. Regarding the imposition of penalty, he argued that once the goods sold to BPCL in line with OCL directives to make use of the subject imported SKO meant for PDS supply, the IOCL being a canalising agent only cannot be made responsible and liabl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that M/s.IOCL, the appellant herein, had any knowledge of selling of SKO by the BPCL, other than PDS. In other words, it is evident that the M/s.IOCL sold the goods to BPCL in compliance of the conditions of the Notification. It is noted that M/s.IOCL had already paid the duty, which was appropriated by the adjudicating authority. In such situation, the imposition of penalty on the appellant is in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
