Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2016 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (1) TMI 1174 - CESTAT MUMBAIImposition of penalty - late filing of Counsel General Manifests for the period from April, 2007 to January, 2009 - delay in filing of manifests on 490 occasions - Held that: - The notice leading to imposition of penalty covered alleged contravention over a period of 22 months and were issued after a lapse of five months following the latest incident covered in the notice. From the response of the appellant to the proceedings before the original authority, all cannot be attributed to deliberate intent or casual approach. The justification offered by the appellant was not considered even though Section 30 of the Customs Act 1962, which empowers the imposition of penalty, enjoins the proper officer to do so. While Section 122A of Customs Act, 1962 prescribes hearing before imposing penalty, the provisions of Section 124 i.e., issue of notice is not a requirement for action under Section 30. From a plain reading of that provision, it would appear that this provision is intended as a summary disposal after hearing. Such summary disposal would have enabled the proper authority to adjudge justification for delay on each occasion instead of peremptory dismissal of justification offered for the 490 occasions at one go. To that extent, it would appear that there has been miscarriage of justice - appeal allowed.
|