9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (9) TMI 519X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eal is against the order of the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) confirming the penalty of Rs.50,000/- on the appellants under Section 114(i) of the Customs Act, 1962. 2. The brief facts of the case are that one M/s. Sai Polymers filed three shipping bills for export of goods declared as "Industrial Lubricant Pericin-9" under DEPB scheme. On suspicious of over invoicing and misdeclaration, a sea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he goods were confiscated, fine and penalty were imposed on the exporter and as well as on the applicant, the same was confirmed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals). Aggrieved by the same, the appellant is before me. 3. Shri S.N. Kantawala, Ld. Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the appellant is the only testing laboratory and the job of the appellant is to examine th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 151) E.L.T. 312 (Tri-Mumbai), wherein it was held that "abatement presupposes knowledge of the proposed offence and also presupposes benefit to be derived by the abetters therefrom - In the absence of conscious knowledge, penalty on charge of aiding and abetting would not sustain". Accordingly, he prayed that the appellant has acted bona fidely and the appellant was nowhere involved in any activit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, it will amount to violation of condition and have to be considered as prohibited goods in terms of Section 2(33) of Customs Act, 1962. He further placed reliance on Transweigh (India) Ltd. v. CC, Mumbai, vide order No. A/176/2009 dated 4-5-2009 [2009 (242) E.L.T. 447 (Tri.)] wherein it was held by this Tribunal that "once the quantity and the value of the impugned goods are misdeclared, the pen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
