TMI Blog2004 (6) TMI 572X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... i Dilip Chandulal Shah. It was submitted that the appellant had injury on his leg and therefore, not able to travel to be present in the hearing. Since the case is very old and it has been specifically posted for hearing on 18-3-2004, adjournment request was rejected and the case was taken up. 2. A penalty of Rs. 2 lakhs has been imposed on Shri Dilip Chandulal Shah. The penalty is under Section 112 (a) of the Customs Act and the finding of the Commissioner is that Shri Shah is guilty of abetment The case related to evasion of customs duty on the import of dyes through mis-declaration of description, value and quantity. The imports were in the name of M/s. Varun International Trading Corporation and Shri B.M. Sood is the Proprietor of tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s through the evidence on record and submitted that the penalty was fully justified. 4. We have perused the records and considered the submissions made by both the sides. The materials on record bring out that Shri Shah was involved in the importation from early stages. As pointed out in the adjudication order, invoice with false particulars of the dyes under import were received in the bank account arranged to be opened in IOB Branch by Shri Shah. He handed over such invoice to Shri Sood for filing along with the bill of entry. Thus, the vital document to facilitate the mis-declaration of the goods was arranged by him. These actions are not being denied also. His role as abeter remains well established. Abetement is specifically included ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsporters to take delivery of the consignment. - Finally, it is Shri Raichura who was contacted by Shri Sood in the tape-recorded conversation about the case in question. In the defence put up on behalf of Shri Raichura, it was admitted that Shri Raichura and Jadeja had - - helped Shri Dilip Shah to smoothen the difference of opinion and mis-understanding between Shri Dilip Shah and Shri Sood. - Helped Shri Dilip Shah and Shri Sood with technical advice solely on humanitarian considerations. - Supplied the data of import prices contained in the published material to Shri Sood and Shri Shah and this constitutes no violation of the Official Secrets Act. - Neither Shri Raichura nor Shri Jadeja rec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ustoms Act, 1962. 6. We have perused the records and heard both the sides. The appellant has contested the order both on the ground of natural justice and merits. The grievance with regard to procedure is that he was not allowed cross-examination. On merits, his submission is that the evidence referred to by the Commissioner does not in any way, make him liable to penalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act. He has pointed out that the case related to evasion of duty by mis-declaration of value and description. It is his submission that he was not the importer and had not filed any documents before the Customs. Nor had he made any declaration about the goods. Further, his specific role as mentioned in the order itself is only that he fur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
