2022 (10) TMI 469

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... h Kumar, Authorized Representative, for the Respondent. ORDER This appeal lies against Order-in-Original No. CAO/22/2012/CAC/CC/BKS, dated 20th April, 2012 of Commissioner of Customs (Adj), New Custom House, Mumbai imposing penalties of Rs. 2,00,000/- and Rs. 1,00,000/- under Section 112(a) of Customs Act, 1962 and Section 114AA of Customs Act, 1962 respectively on the appellant herein. 2.&emsp .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of goods did not arise on account of any action on the part of the appellant herein, a businessman, who had no connection whatsoever with the imports. It was also pointed out that the Tribunal, on appeal of Shri Nitin Jatania, a co-noticee, in the proceedings, penalty was set aside by relying the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in Hamid Fahim Ansari v. Commissioner of Customs (Import), Nh .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed by the shipping company at the instance of overseas suppliers and none of the documents prescribed under Foreign Trade (Development & Regulation) Act, 1992, or any other law in force, with which the appellant may, at a stretch, be connected with has been filed under Customs Act, 1962. The link between action leading to confiscation of goods and the appellant, is, therefore, not established. Con .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X