9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 168X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he CHA could not be established, which is also more or less the findings of the first appellate authority - penalty set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - C/21010/2016-SM, C/21011/2016-SM, C/21797/2016-SM, C/20080/2017-SM, C/20081/2017-SM, C/20082/2017-SM, C/20289/2017-SM - Final Order No. 22238-22244/2017 - Dated:- 25-9-2017 - Shri M.V.Ravindran, Judicial Member None (written submissons) N D George High Court Adv For the Respondent Mr. Naveen Kushalappa, AR - For the Respondent ORDER Per : M.V.Ravindran All these appeals are taken up together for disposal by a common order, as the issue involved is common and in respect of different importers. 2. None appeared on behalf of the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ial duty along with interest and paid 25% amount of duty as penalty as provided under Section 28(6) of the Customs Act, 1962. He would rely upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Adani Wilmar Ltd.: 2015(330) ELT 549 ; and Commissioner of Customs (II) Airport Special Cargo, Mumbai vs. Samir Vora: 2015 (330) ELT 609 (Tri.-Mum.) for non-imposition of personal penalty under Section 114 of Customs Act, 1962. 5. On a careful consideration of the submissions made, I find that the penalties imposed on the appellants under provisions of Sections 112(a) seems to be unwarranted as the findings of the first appellate authority on appeals filed before her are as under: I find that the importer has categorically admitted their mis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ape its liability by fixing the blame entirely on the importer. By virtue of the above, I pass the following order. ORDER 10. I reject the appeal and uphold the impugned Order-in-original. 5.1 From the above reproduced findings, it can be noticed that though the liability and confiscation of the goods has been upheld, the fact remains that the importer has misstated and accepted that it was their mistake in directing the CHA not to include freight element and in order to achieve it, they had instructed for manipulating the shipping bills. Be that as it may, charge of abetment on the CHA could not be established, which is also more or less the findings of the first appellate authority. 6. In view of the foregoing, I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
