Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2022 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (5) TMI 1506 - CESTAT MUMBAILevy of penalty u/s 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962 - diversion of goods imported under DEEC scheme, which were diverted to the domestic market without fulfilment of export obligation as provided for - HELD THAT:- The company of the appellant was undertaking the job work on the material supplied by M/s. Sumira Plastics. It is nowhere recorded that the appellant had any knowledge with regard to the fact of importation of the goods claiming the benefit under DEEC scheme. Only because the appellant knew Shri G.N. Pai cannot be a reason for claiming that the appellant was in hand in glove for the fraud committed by Shri Pai in diverting the goods imported by him under DEEC scheme. Appellant’s company was acting in normal job work activities on the material provided by Shri G.N. Pai. It is not even the case of the Revenue that certain documents or certain evidences have been received showing that the appellant could be attributed with a positive knowledge about the imported nature of the goods. It is evident from Section 112(b) of the Customs Act that positive knowledge or mens rea is an active ingredient for imposition of penalty under Section 112(b) - In absence of any positive knowledge, penalty imposed under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act cannot be sustained. Appeal allowed.
|