9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 1345X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oms Act, 1962 - HELD THAT:- It is found from the records of the case that Shri J. Shamsudeen has been the authorised signatory of the respondents. He has filed various documents and liasoned with the customs authorities in the imports under taken by the respondents. He was in the knowledge of the fact that for each of their imports they carried two sets of invoices (i) one showing a lesser value for the purpose of customs and the other showing higher value for the purpose of actual payment - Shri J Shamsudeen has made himself liable to pay penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. Penalty of ₹ 54,76,724/- along with applicable interest imposed on Shri J. Shamsudeen, Authorised Signatory, of the respondents, under Secti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ice was issued seeking to revalue the goods imported by respondents vide 14 bills of entry from ₹ 28,27,723/- to ₹ 1,75,47,227/-; demanding differential duty of ₹ 54,76,724/- along with interest and seeking imposition of penalty under 114A/114AA/112(a) of Customs Act, 1962. Commissioner of Customs vide Order dated 03/03/2009 has confirmed the redetermination of duty and duty demanded. He imposed penalty of ₹ 54,76,724/- on Shri J. Shamsudeen, Authorised Signatory under Section 114A of the Customs Act, 1962. He has also appropriated ₹ 3,00,000/- deposited by the respondents during the course of investigation. Committee of Chief Commissioner has reviewed the said order of the Commissioner. 2. Department ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y placed the order and was to gain financially from the import, was behind the scene operator who caused the import of goods which are liable to confiscation and therefore is liable to penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. In view of the above, penalty under Section 14A should be imposed on Smt. V.M. Hareefa, the Proprietrix and not on Shri J. Shamsudeen. (ii) Shri J. Shamsudeen having colluded with their supplier, wilfully suppressed and misstated facts before Customs and is responsible for under valuation of the goods imported by M/s. Flower World, is liable for penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 and not under Section 114A as held by the Commissioner. 3. Learned AR for the Department ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as the case may be, as determined under [sub-section (8) of section 28] shall also be liable to pay a penalty equal to the duty or interest so determined : [ Provided that where such duty or interest, as the case may be, as determined under [sub-section (8) of section 28], and the interest payable thereon under section [28AA], is paid within thirty days from the date of the communication of the order of the proper officer determining such duty, the amount of penalty liable to be paid by such person under this section shall be twenty-five per cent of the duty or interest, as the case may be, so determined: Provided further that the benefit of reduced penalty under the first proviso shall be available subject to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te on which the Finance Act, 2000 receives the assent of the President; (ii) any amount paid to the credit of the Central Government prior to the date of communication of the order referred to in the first proviso or the fourth proviso shall be adjusted against the total amount due from such person.] 7. A reading of the above provisions of Section 114A makes it very clear that the penalty under this Section is payable by the person by whom duty or interest there upon is payable. In this case duty is payable by the respondents i.e., M/s. Flower World. It being a proprietary concern the duty is payable by Smt. V.M. Hareefa. We also find that the case law cited above supports this contention. Therefore, we find that the im ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
