9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 867X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... een field by the Revenue against OIA-AHM-CUSTM-000-APP-210-14-15 dated 2.6.2014. 2. Shri G P Thomas, Authorised Representative, appearing on behalf of the Revenue argued that penalty was required to be imposed upon the appellant as the person engaged in the preparation of forged Challan was appearing as an agent of the respondent. That any action committed by the agent has to be treated as an act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the employee of their clearing agent during customs clearance of their imported goods. The respondent has relied upon the case laws of Super Chemicals Ltd and Others Vs CC Kandla where as per Order No. A/10516-10535/2014 dated 4.4.2014 under similar circumstances following observations have been made by this Bench with respect to the penalties imposed upon the importers, Para 12 of the order dt 4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction 112 (a) of the Customs Act 1962 in as much as the importers or their employees never could have had a doubt that their goods are liable for confiscation, as the said goods were removed on BOE on which there was payment of duty. In any case, importers having discharged the customs duty and the interest thereof on all the goods imported by them, the question of visiting them with penalty does ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
