Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2022 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (10) TMI 708 - CESTAT CHENNAILevy of penalty u/s 114 of the Customs Act, 1962 - Smuggling - alleged act of omission / commission - Red Sander Logs - appellant is aggrieved by the direction of the Commissioner (Appeals) remanding the matter to the adjudicating authority to reconsider the non-imposition of penalty on the appellant under sec. 114 of the Customs Act, 1962 - HELD THAT:- From the facts narrated, it can be seen that the adjudicating authority had absolved the appellant from imposing penalty. On perusal of the impugned order, it is seen that after appreciating the facts, the Commissioner (Appeals) has noted that one consignment was already cleared and this was the second consignment that was intercepted by the DRI. She has taken a view that it is obvious that the appellant has abetted Shri Sabarivasan and his aides in misusing the IEC of M/s. Polyhose India (Rubber) Pvt. Ltd. and therefore is liable for penalty under sec. 114 of the Customs Act, 1962. In the present case, the role of the appellant as brought out from the evidence is in arranging the container. The said goods namely ‘container’ has not been confiscated. Further, the learned counsel for the appellant has raised argument on the basis of the recent Notification No. 56/2015-2020 dated 18.2.2019. Therefore, whether the items namely red sanders was restricted item (license needed for export) during the relevant time has to be examined, it is opined that as the Commissioner (Appeals) has only remanded the matter to relook into the non-imposition of penalty. The appellant would be getting sufficient chance to put forward documents and arguments to establish their innocence. Appeal dismissed.
|