9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (2) TMI 1416X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... various documents like Commercial Invoice, Bill of Lading, Certificate of Weight, Certificate of quality, High Sea Sale Agreement, if any, and other particulars like 'demurrage charges, if any, paid for which Bills of Entry were 'provisionally assessed' under Section 18 of the Customs Act, 1962 pending submission of desired documents. The Appellant had executed Provisional Duty Bonds in terms of Regulation 3 of the Customs (Provisional Duty Assessment)Regulations, 2011, which were accepted by the then Assistant/Deputy Commissioner of Customs, while allowing for 'provisional assessment'. A Show Cause Notice dated 12.04.2016 was issued by the Department proposing penalty under Regulation 5 of Customs (Provisional Duty Assessment) Regulations, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, it is clear that the provision gives discretion for imposition of penalty and provides maximum penalty of Rs. 50,000. The Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) enhanced the penalty to Rs. 50,000 for each of the 4 Bills of Entry which remain to be finalized. There is neither allegation in the Show Cause Notice nor in any lower authorities order that the Appellant had delayed the submissions of the documents deliberately or with any mala fide intention. 4. It is further submitted that there is no revenue involved in the whole case. It is merely a procedural lapse which has rightly been held by the Ld. Adjudicating Authority. It is well settled law that in case of procedural lapses, penalty cannot be imposed on the assessee. Further, there ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enefits cannot be denied due to procedural lapses [2019 (370) E.L.T. 1352 (Tri. - All.)]. 5.8 Even under the Customs (Provisional Duty Assessment) Regulations, 2011, penalty cannot be imposed for a bona fide lapse of late submission of requisite documents. [2015 (329) E.L.T. 401 (Tri. - Ahd.)]. 6. Shri S. Mukhopadhyay, Ld. Authorized Representative for the Revenue, justified the impugned order. 7. Heard both sides through video conferencing and perused the Appeal records. 8. I find that this is a case of delay in furnishing of certain documents. There is no revenue implication. The department has not been able to establish any deliberate delay or any mala fide intention on the part of the appellant. As and when the appellant could gath ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
