9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 1425X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proceedings were against two parties, namely, M/s Atlas Interactive India Pvt Ltd, New Delhi and the present appellant. We are dealing only with the appeal by the present appellant as there is no appeal presented before us by the main appellant Company. The brief facts of the case are that M/s Atlas Interactive India Pvt Ltd, New Delhi imported telecommunication equipments under the cover of 14 bills of entry during the period December, 2004 to June, 2005 in connection with the business venture with BSNL. Applicable duty amounting to Rs. 5,72,86,723/- has been paid on such imported goods. Due to some dispute with BSNL, the imported goods could not be used in India. The importer filed shipping bills on 08.11.2006 for re-export of the said c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llant mainly submitted that the goods meant for re-export were illegally kept in the custody of customs without any proper seizure or documentation under Section 110. The Slovakia Company is duly incorporated in British Virgin Islands as per International Business Companies Act. Copy of the incorporation received through email was submitted. The appellant is only one of the Directors of the importing company. As a paid employee of the company, he cannot be penalized under the provisions of Customs Act. He acted as per the instructions of the authorities in the company and had not gained personally anything out of these transactions. The appellant is no more a Director of the company. During the pendency of this appeal, the company was struc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y. As a Director, he himself is the senior authority in the company. He cannot be treated as a simple paid employee doing routine job. He supported the findings of the original authority for imposing of penalty on the appellant. 4. We have heard both the sides and perused appeal record. 5. As noted already, we have before us only appeal by the present appellant. The facts narrated in the impugned order and also as submitted before the Hon'ble Delhi High Court during the various stages of the case clearly bring out a position that the transaction starting from the import of the consignment and upto the issue of impugned order cannot be considered as a bonafide business transaction. The various unanswered critical points clearly give an imp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ected to the present dispute, it is not clear as to why he is coordinating the action with the CHA and deposed before the customs authorities in the follow up investigations also. In other words, an un-connected employee of a company, as claimed by the appellant, has no business in these activities. 7. The ld Counsel raised a legal objection regarding applicability of Section 114 AA for the acts committed prior to the introduction of this Section. We note that the chronology of the events, as submitted by the appellant himself, will show the origin of the dispute had arisen from the date of import in December, 2004; the attempted export and various connected issues continued thereafter as could be seen from the dates of filing earlier ship ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
