TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 507X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndorsement, the goods were loaded on the ship under the supervision of the Customs authorities at port. In view of the fact that exporter did not have any control over loading of container on the vessel, I find it is a fit case that no penalty should be levied for the alleged violation - Decided in favour of assessee. - C/85330 & 85127/2013-Mum - Final Order Nos. A/438-439/2014-WZB/C-IV(SMB) - Dated:- 7-1-2014 - Shri Anil Choudhary, Member (J) Shri Joseph Kodianthara, Advocate, for the Appellant. Shri M.S. Reddy, Dy. Commissioner (AR), for the Respondent. ORDER Heard the parties. 2. The appellant herein is a manufacturer of tyres and they exports tyres. In respect of both the appeals, the tyres were stuffed in the f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under the provisions of Section 13(g) and accordingly liable to penalty under Section 114(iii) of the Act. The goods were held liable to confiscation. Being aggrieved, the appellant is before this Tribunal. 3. The ld. Counsel submits that the show cause notice have been issued almost 3 years from the date of occurrence and hence prima facie proceedings is bad and time-barred. It is further argued that there is no incentive for the exporter to do any mischief as the goods were stuffed in the factory under the Central Excise department supervision. Further the appellant had engaged the services of CHA who was responsible for the work of clearance, etc. and accordingly there is no procedural lapse on the part of appellant. The appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vessel is complete only after LEO is given by proper officer of Customs. If vessel sails before it is given LEO, exporter or their CHA, cannot get away from their responsibility, and are liable to penalty. 5. I have considered the rival submissions. I find that shipping bills were presented under the EDP system almost two days prior and further the goods were stuffed under the supervision of Excise/Customs authorities in the factory. In the present case as per the endorsement, the goods were loaded on the ship under the supervision of the Customs authorities at port. In view of the fact that exporter did not have any control over loading of container on the vessel, I find it is a fit case that no penalty should be levied for the alleged ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
