9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 1184X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lls of Entry also, and they have been finalised. As there was a delay in submission of documents in respect of two Bills of Entry, the Department initiated proceedings for imposition of penalty under Regulation 5 of the above said Regulations 2011. The adjudicating authority has imposed a penalty of Rs.20,000/- as the appellant has already submitted the documents in respect of the two Bills of Entry and they also have been finalised. The Appellant cited various decisions in support of their contention that reduced penalty can be imposed for such procedural violations - On perusal of decisions cited by the appellant in support of their contentions that the enhanced penalty is not sustainable in this case. In the case of M/S JAI BALAJI INDUST ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l 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 the Bills of Entry were assessed provisionally, as per Section 18 of the Customs Act, 1962, pending submission of the documents. As per Regulation 3(3) of the Customs (Provisional Duty Assessment) Regulations, 2011, the appellant has to submit the documents within one month or within the extended period the proper officer may allow, so as to finalise the provisional assessments. In the present case, the appellant has neither submitted the documents within the stipulated time period nor obtained any extension of time from the proper officer for submission of the documents. 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... laji Industries Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), Bhubaneswar [2021 (376) ELT 730 (Tri.-Kolkata)] (ii) MSP Steel Power Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), Bhubaneswar [Final Order No. 75235 of 2022 dated 09.02.2022 in Customs Appeal No.75465 of 2019 CESTAT, Kolkata] 4. In view of the decisions cited above, the appellant prayed for setting aside the enhanced penalty imposed in the impugned order. 5. The Ld. Authorized Representative appearing for the Revenue submits that submission of documents within the stipulated time period is necessary for timely finalization of the provisional assessments. Delay in submission of documents have delayed the finalization of the provisional assessment and consequently realization of d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e case of M/s. Jai Balaji Industries Ltd. (supra), this Tribunal has held as under:- 9. 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 gather the requisite documents they were presented before the assessing officers for finalising the provisional assessments. In fact, out of the 35 Bills of Entry involved, 27 could be finalised even before passing of the adjudication order. Keeping all this in view, the adjudicating authority took a fair decision and imposed a nominal penalty of Rs. 20,000/- which comes to Rs. 2,500/- for each of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
