Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2015 (5) TMI 801

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... importer (i.e., Mr P.K. Tiwari), who, as the narration of facts hereinafter will indicate, according to the respondents, is a spectre, was called upon to answer the following: ".....B. Further, M/s TNT Express India Pvt. Ltd., EICI Terminal, IGI Airport, New Delhi, Shri Rakesh Kumar Gupta S/o Shri Shiv Prasad Gupta R/o S592, School Block Shakarpur, Nehru Enclave, Delhi, Shri Satendra Panwar, Superintendent Customs, IGI Airport, New Delhi and Shri Surender Singh, Inspector Customs, IGI Airport, New Delhi are required to show cause to the Commissioner of Customs (Export), New Customs House, Near I.G.I. Airport, New Delhi, within 30 days of receipt of this notice as to why penalty should not be imposed upon them under section 112(a) of the sa .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... penalty was imposed in the sum of Rs. 1 lac on the petitioner under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 (in short the 1962 Act). The adjudication order, inter alia, also ordered confiscation of goods valued at Rs. 74,97,500/-. The order went on to say that the said goods would vest absolutely in the Central Government, and that, since they were perishable, they would be disposed of within one month of the order, in terms of Section 110(1A) of the 1962 Act. 3.1 In so far as Mr P.K. Tiwari is concerned, who even according to the respondent is a non-existent entity, and almost a ghost, a penalty in the sum of Rs. 5 lacs was imposed; whereas, as indicated above, a penalty of Rs. 1 lac was imposed on the petitioner. 3.2 As is evident from .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... by the assessing officer. (v) M/s TNT Express India Pvt. Ltd. failed to fulfil the obligations stipulated under Regulation 12(iii) and (iv) of the Courier Imports and Exports (Electronic Declaration and Processing) Regulations, 2010. The said provisions are as under: Regulation 12(iii) Advise his consignor or consignee to comply with the provisions of the Act, rules and regulations made there under and in case of non-compliance thereof he shall bring the matter to the notice of the Assistant Commissioner of Customs or Deputy Commissioner of Customs. Regulation 12(iv) Verify the antecedent, correctness of Importer Exporter Code (IEC) Number, identity of his client and the functioning of his client in the declared address by using relia .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sequences which befell the petitioner, was the imposition of a penalty in the sum of Rs. 1 lac. The adjudicating officer in paragraphs 60 and 61 of the order dated 18.11.2013, while recording that the petitioner had abetted the improper importation of the goods in issue by its acts of omission and commission, and noting thereafter that it was liable for action under Regulation 13 of the 2010 Regulations, did not proceed to impose any penalty, as was possible in terms of the said regulation. 5. In these circumstances, I had put to the learned counsel for respondent no.2, as to whether the adjudicating officer had been rendered in "functus officio" with regard to the impugned order. 6. Learned counsel for respondent no.2 submits that the im .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e reasons given hereinabove. The Commissioner of Customs became functus officio upon passing the order of adjudication dated 18.11.2013. It is not disputed by the learned counsel for respondent no.2 that the said respondent could have filed an appeal against the adjudication order, if it was dissatisfied or aggrieved by the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs. It appears that, respondent no.2, has not preferred an appeal. 9. Therefore, in the aforesaid circumstances, the impugned order is set aside. This, however, will not come in the way of the respondents to take recourse to an appropriate remedy, if it was otherwise available to it, even at this juncture. 10. The writ petition is allowed. The impugned order is set aside. Needle .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates