Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2023 (7) TMI 593

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tirely different circumstances and ratio of the said finding is not applicable in appellant s case. Similarly in the matter of Allen Bradley India ltd. [ 1991 (8) TMI 192 - CEGAT, NEW DELHI] , this Tribunal has set aside the fine and penalty imposed by the Adjudicating Authority and permitted the appellant to re-export the goods. Similarly in the matter of Agarwal Industries Corporation Ltd.(Supra) omission on the part of the appellant was regarding the mis-declaration of the country of origin and subsequently the appellant had taken effective steps and cleared the goods on furnishing license for clearance of goods. In the present case, there is no evidence to substantiate the allegations regarding involvement of appellant in producing frau .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r. Bharat Chugh , Advocate & Mr. Sanyat lodha , Advocate for the Appellant Mr. Rajesh Shastry, Authorised Representative for the Respondent ORDER PER : P. A. AUGUSTIAN When the miscellaneous petition for Early Hearing, Stay petition and application for amendment of stay petition came up for hearing, the learned Counsel for the appellants submitted that the matter was considered by the Division Bench earlier and considering the monetary limit, the matter was transferred for the consideration of Single Member. Learned counsel requested for final hearing today. Learned D.R. appearing for the Respondent submitted that he has got no objection in considering the appeal on merit today. Considering the same, appeal is taken up for final hearing .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... lso. FIR was lodged by the appellant herein and the said Shri Ravi Shekhar Jha was arrested and remanded to judicial custody. In the meantime Customs Department also conducted investigation and filed criminal complaint and the crime was registered as Crime No.110/2019 before the Hon'ble Court of 2nd ACJM, Bengaluru district. However, as per the Police report, the appellant was exonerated from the crime of committing any fraudulent activity. The proceedings under Customs Act, 1962 initiated by the respondent is concluded by issuing Show Cause Notice dated 26.04.2019. In the mean time, appellant requested for provisional release of goods. When there was no response to the request for provisional release, appellant filed Writ Petition No.2489 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... appeal filed by the appellants. 5. The learned counsel also retreated the ground of appeal and relied on the Final Order issued by this Tribunal in the case of M/s Baby Marine Seafood Retail Pvt. Ltd. V/s Commissioner of Customs, Cochin in Customs Appeal No.20401 of 2020 having Final order No.20117 of 2021 dated 26.04.2021, M/s Allen Bradely India Ltd. V/s Collector of Customs having Order No.A/448/1991-NRB in Customs Appeal No.2638 of 1990 dated 12.08.1991 and also in the case of M/s Agarwal Industries Corporation Ltd. V/s The Commissioner of Customs in Customs Appeal No.20172 of 2015 dated 27.01.2020 and submitted that imposing fine & penalty on appellant is arbitrary and unsustainable. Regarding loss and prejudice caused to appellant, .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... uments for clearance and adjudication authority categorically stated that appellant was not knowingly involved in the creation of false DGFT license. Thus appellant can be treated only as a victim of fraud committed by the co-noticee Shri Ravi Shekhar Jha. For that reason, no penalty can be imposed on him under Section 112 A of the Customs Act, 1962. Regarding redemption fine, thought the appellant is not involved in the fraudulent activity, the goods imported by the appellant is illegally imported without valid license and for that reason, goods are liable for confiscation. There is no allegation of undervaluation and also there is no finding regarding the margin of profit earned by the appellant through such import. The goods were detaine .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates