9911796707
TMI Blog1979 (9) TMI 72X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onnes of high speed diesel oil which ought to have been delivered at Cochin and that the petitioner representing its principals was liable to pay a penalty of Rs. 62,353.29 under Section 116 of the Customs Act, 1962. This order was confirmed in appeal by the 2nd respondent by Ext. P2 order dated 15-4-1975, and, subject to a reduction of the penalty to Rs. 20,000/-, by the 3rd respondent by Ext. P4 order dated 18-11-1976. These orders are challenged by the petitioner. 2. Counsel for the petitioner, Shri Pathrose Mathai, submits that the impugned orders are invalid in so far as the authorities have failed to take into account certain relevant facts. Counsel points out that the total cargo mentioned in the bill of lading is an approximate qu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lity upon the person in-charge of the conveyance. He has to account for the shortage to the satisfaction of the Customs authorities. 4. Shri Pathrose Mathai refers to the decision of the Supreme Court in Hindustan Steel Limited v. State of Orissa - A.I.R. 1970 S.C. 253 = 1978 (2) E.L.T. (J 159) and submits that in the absence of any evidence to show that the carrier acted "deliberately in defiance of law, or was guilty of conduct contumacious or dishonest, or acted in conscious disregard of its obligation," the Customs authorities are not justified in imposing a penalty under Section 116. 5. The question which arose in A.I.R. 1970 S.C. 253 was whether the persons in charge of the affairs of a company bona fide and justifiably believed t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ought not to have done. 7. I am not satisfied that the impugned orders suffer from any such infirmity. The authorities took note of various facts. The quantity discharged at Kandla which was earlier the port of call was taken into account. The quantity which was liable to be lost for various reasons was given credit for by allowing 1.3 per cent reduction. Furthermore, the 3rd respondent, to cover the possibility of any excessive leakage, reduced the penalty imposed by the Customs Collector to Rs. 20,000/-. Thus the authorities had taken into account all the relevant facts and circumstances. 8. Shri Pathrose Mathai points out that Section 116 is not attracted unless the consignee himself has a case of short landing. In considering the qu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
