Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (6) TMI 614 - CESTAT CHENNAI

2015 (6) TMI 614 - CESTAT CHENNAI - 2015 (329) E.L.T. 872 (Tri. - Chennai) - Imposition of penalties - smuggling of 'Ketamine Hydrochloride' concealed in the export consignment as 'Onions' - Misdeclaration of goods - Held that:- Adjudicating authority has imposed penalty of ₹ 10,00,000/- on M/s. Manohar Enterprises and ₹ 5,00,000/- on Shri.R. Muthuramalingam, under Section 117 of the Customs Act. Therefore, by virtue of limitation provided under Section 117 adjudicating authority has .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

aside on both the appellants. - Decided partly in favour of appellant. - C/94-95/2010 - Final Order Nos. 40349-40350/2015 - Dated:- 23-3-2015 - R. Periasami, Member (T),JJ. For the Appellant : Mr Shiv Shankar (Co. Associate) & Mr A Mohd. Ismail, Adv For the Respondent : Ms Indira Sisupal, AC (AR) ORDER Per: R Periasami: Both the appeals are arising out of a common order against the imposition of penalty. Hence both are taken up together for disposal. 2. The brief facts of the case are that .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

. 3. The Commissioner of Customs (Export), Chennai in his order dated 18.11.2009 absolutely confiscated 'Ketamine Hydrochloride' and imposed penalty on the exporter of ₹ 10,00,000/-, ₹ 10,00,000/- on the CHA firm M/s. Manohar Enterprises, ₹ 5,00,000/- on Shri Muthuramalingam, partner of CHA and ₹ 1,00,000/- on Shri Sivakumar, clerk of M/s. Manohar Enterprises. Only V. Manohar of M/s. Manohar Enterprises and Shri R. Muthuramalingam filed appeals against the penalty .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

clearly brought out that the entire modus operandi was carried out between the exporter R. Viswanathan and Shri Sivakumar, the clerk of the CHA company. The clerk had deliberately connived with the exporter and signed all the documents and also MOT. The CHA was not involved and the Shipping Bills were filed in their name. They have co-operated with the investigating agency and customs. He also submits that no action initiated under CHALR by the department. Regarding imposition of penalty on the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

elied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case Saini Consultants Vs. Cestat - 2013 (293) ELT A25 (S.C.). 6. Heard both sides. 7. On perusal of the records, I find that the short issue involved relates to imposition of penalties on the appellants ie., CHA in connection with smuggling of 'Ketamine Hydrochloride' concealed in the export consignment as 'Onions' vide shipping bill No. 3201809 dated 10.11.2008. On perusal of the show cause notice dated 12.05.2009 an .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ion 117 of the Customs Act. Whereas, Section 114 was invoked for imposition of penalty on the proprietor of the firm Shri R.Viswanathan. Since the department invoked only Section 117 of the Customs Act for imposition of penalty on CHA and on the partner of the CHA firm, and this section relates to imposition of penalty not expressively provided elsewhere and the maximum penalty is not exceeding ₹ 1,00,000/-. 8. Prima facie, I find that under adjudicating authority has imposed penalty of &# .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

. As regards the appellant's contention that they have not played any role and only their clerk has connived with the exporter and they are not liable for any penalty is not acceptable for the simple reason that any act of their employee, CHA cannot absolve from their liability. Further as already discussed above, this is not the case where the penalty has been imposed on the appellants under Section 114 of the Customs Act, in their case penalty is imposed under Section 117 of the Customs Ac .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version