9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (9) TMI 131X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rrying these goods for amendment in the manifest seeking to change the name of the importer from M.D. Corporation to Relaxo Plastics on the ground that the goods have been sold in the high seas by M.D. Corporation to Relaxo Plastics. This amendment was permitted. Relaxo Plastics thereafter filed bill of entry for clearance of these goods and produced the advance licence on the basis of which it claimed clearance without payment of duty under appropriate exemption notification. Before clearance could be effected against this licence, information was received by customs house that advance licence had not been issued by the licensing authority but had been forged and that there was no firm or entity named Relaxo Plastics. The Customs House con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ;On the basis of these investigations, the department seized the goods and also proposed to confiscate the goods under clause (d) of section 111 of the Act, the goods not being covered by that licence. The Collector's order also records that M.D. Corporation and others had rendered themselves liable for confiscation. M.D. Corporation waived issue of written notice. It is contended on behalf of Rajesh Desai that no notice was issued to him either in writing or orally. The advocates Mr. Arun Mehta for T.S. Makkad and Mr. H.R. Shetty for Rajesh Desai are unable to tell us what the position was with regard to their client. Ram Avtar Agrawal, who is present, also does not recall whether he was issued notice or not. 3. The contention whic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s bill of entry withdrawn and had the fresh bill of entry filed by Relaxo Plastics. The statement of R. Damani and R. Desai is relied upon to show that Bhura paid Rs. 6.8 lakhs towards premium for the licence. We agree that on the basis of the facts before us, it is not possible to say with any degree of confidence that Uttam Bhura was solely a victim of the scheme by Relaxo Plastics. It is not improbable that the person may sell the goods through a broker to another person, without coming into contact with the seller. However, Bhura has taken upon him liabilities beyond that of a seller of goods. He instructed the customs house agent to prepare the bill of entry on behalf of Relaxo Plastics, which is not the practice of a straight forward ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tently invoked in this case to impose penalty on them. Clause (a) of Section 112 clearly would not apply since the goods are not liable to confiscation. Accordingly clause (b) will also apply. 9. The appeal proposed penalty on the broker for "illegal trading for non-transferable advance licence which is not permitted under the import Policy and in the DEEC notification condition". It is not the function of the customs department to enforce contravention of the import policy per se. The eligibility to the notification does not arise for the reason that it had not been claimed. There is therefore no case for penalty on any of the brokers. This conclusion is on the assumption that they were given notice for penalty which does not appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
