9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 1841X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thereof. Hence, we do not find any infirmity in the impugned, in so far as it has dropped the show cause proceedings against the CHA s, seeking for imposition of penalty. With regard to the issue of imposition of penalty on Shri Jagdish Sharma, Manager of the respondent, Revenue has contended that he was having an ID Card for collecting the licenses from DGFT, which implies that he was well aware of the provisions of Export and Import Policy and accordingly, is exposed to the penal consequences provided under Section 112(a) ibid. We find that the Revenue has not brought on any iota of evidence to substantiate the fact of that the said employee of the respondent did any act or omission which have rendered the imported goods liable for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [Order per : S.K. Mohanty, Member (J)]. - Revenue has filed these appeals against the impugned order dated 31-12-2010 passed by the Commissioner of Customs, New Customs House, Mumbai. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that M/s. Stayle Corporation Ltd., Respondent herein had imported duty free raw material namely, Polyester Fabrics of varying GSM b/w upto 250 gsm. to 280 gsm. The said goods were imported duty free pursuant to the advance licenses issued by the office of Jt. D.G.F.T., Mumbai with a condition that imported Polyester Fabrics should be used in manufacture of finished product Grey/Dyed Fabrics with embroidery and Ladies Long Coat with lining. The respondent got the advance licenses registered at Mumbai Custom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Prashant Freight Forwarders Pvt. Ltd. and Shri Jagdish Sharma, Manager of the respondent. 2.1 Revenue has assailed the impugned order on the ground that the Ld. Adjudicating Authority has erred in not imposing penalty on Shri Omprakash Tiwari and Shri S.K. Mehra, the CHAs. It has been contended in the appeal memorandum that since the goods were imported against advance license and the benefit of exemption were extended to such imports, the said CHAs were responsible for due compliance of the requirement of conditions laid down in Notification No. 43/2002-CUS., dated 19-4-2002. Thus, Revenue has contended that those CHAs are exposed to the penal consequences provided under Section 112 (a) ibid. Further, Revenue has also contended that Shr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has dropped the show cause proceedings against the CHA s, seeking for imposition of penalty. With regard to the issue of imposition of penalty on Shri Jagdish Sharma, Manager of the respondent, Revenue has contended that he was having an ID Card for collecting the licenses from DGFT, which implies that he was well aware of the provisions of Export and Import Policy and accordingly, is exposed to the penal consequences provided under Section 112(a) ibid. We find that the Revenue has not brought on any iota of evidence to substantiate the fact of that the said employee of the respondent did any act or omission which have rendered the imported goods liable for confiscation. Since, the department specifically alleged that penal provisions ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
