9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (9) TMI 815X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Respondent ORDER The only issue to be decided in both these appeals is the levy of penalty under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962 of Rs. 50,000/- and Rs. 1,00,000/- on the first and second appellant respectively. 2. Heard Ms. K. Nancy, Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellants and Shri R. Rajaram, Learned Assistant Commissioner (Authorized Representative) appearing on behalf ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing bill was not made, thereby misdeclaring the description in order to evade payment of Export Duty and avail undue benefit of drawback claim; that semi-finished leather would attract a higher rate of Export Duty at 60% of the value, most of the boxes in the cargo were declared as finished leather and that therefore, there was an attempt to export 26 bundles of semi-finished leather without payme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e case of the appellants inter alia that on suspicion, the appellants dismissed one of its employees Shri Thangaraj; that the impugned order does not cite any evidence when it states that Shri Thangaraj may be a puppet in the hands of the appellants; that the impugned order is based on no evidence; that it is based on surmise and conjecture; that the penalty has been levied although there is no ev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sufficient suspicion as to the collusion of the CHA with the exporter. There is also no denial by the appellants that out of the 31 bundles, only 5 bundles contained finished leather whereas the remaining 26 bundles contained semi-finished leather, which fact was also confirmed by the CLRI upon testing. Further, it is the appellant's admission that their staff had overwritten the package numbers, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
