TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 758X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... importer. In these circumstances, the impugned car is liable for confiscation. We also find that the redemption fine imposed is highly excessive. Therefore, we reduce the redemption fine to ₹ 5 lakhs. On payment of such redemption fine, the car shall be released to Appellant No.2. Further we find that the appellant is the bona fide purchaser of the car and no statement of the appellant has been recorded and no role of the appellant has been discussed. Therefore, we hold that penalties under sections 112(a) and 114AA were not imposable on the appellant. In these circumstances, the appellant is entitled to take the possession of the car on payment of redemption fine of ₹ 5 lakhs. Penalty on the appellant has been dropped but the penalty on Shri G.S. Prince was imposed. Further we find that in the case of CC Vs. Vaz Forwarding Ltd.(2010 (12) TMI 503 - AHMEDABAD HIGH COURT), wherein the penalty was dropped on the CHA in absence of evidence of the knowledge of the CHA. Further, in the case of S.Y Ranade (supra), it was held that there is no evidence to prove the involvement of the CHA and an employee has suo moto acted for his personal greed and beyond the scope of his d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shvas Udai Singh Laad was not available at the residence at that time. Thereafter, a Show cause Notice was issued to Shri Sumit Walia, Shri Tarun Kumar and the Appellant Nos. 1 2. On the basis of investigations, it was alleged that the car in question imported was old and used car and was heavily under-valued to evade payment of duty and it was also revealed from the investigations that the appellant before us have aided and abetted avoid Shri Sumit Walia for illegal importation of the car. The matter was adjudicated. The penalties of ₹ 10 lakhs each under sections 112(a) and 114AA of Customs Act, 1962 on Appellant No.1 were imposed. On appellant No.2 penalty of ₹ 10 lakhs was imposed under section 112(b) of the Act. The vehicle in question was confiscated and allowed to redeem on payment of redemption fine of ₹ 22 lakhs. Aggrieved from the said order, appellants are before us. Arguments on behalf of the Appellant No.2 3. Ld. counsel for the Appellant No.2 submits that the appellant is a bona fide purchaser of the car as he purchased the car in good faith and have no role on illegal importation of the car by Shri Sumit Walia or Shri Tarun Kumar. He submits ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r. Therefore, he prayed that the penalties under sections 112(a) and 114AA of the Act are not imposable on the appellant without recording the statement of the appellant. In these terms, he prayed that the impugned order qua confiscation of the car and imposition of penalties under sections 112(a) and 114AA of the Act against the appellant be set aside. Arguments on behalf of the Appellant No.1 6. On behalf of the Appellant No.1, the counsel submits that the statements of Shri Sumit Walia and Shri G.S. Prince, Green card holder of the appellant were recorded, but no statement of any of the partners of the appellant firm was recorded nor any summons were issued to them. Shri G.S. Prince, in his statement exposed Shri Sumit Walia and Shri Tarun Kumar, but he has not imputed any knowledge of this activities to his masters, i.e., the appellant. The Show Cause Notice has been issued to the appellant through inculpatory statement of Shri G.S. Prince, but Shri G.S. Prince was not made party to the Show Cause Notice. He further submits that the car was allowed for clearance after examination and submission of documents by Shri G.S. Prince after assessment. Shri G.S. Prince was handli ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and submitted that in this case car has been imported by Shri Tarun Kumar through Shri Sumit Walia, who is the master mind behind the smuggled nature of the imported car and during the course of investigation it was found that the car was highly under-valued and shown as new instead of old. The car was found in the possession of Appellant No.2 and the employee of Appellant No.1 was actively involved in the activity. In these circumstances, he prayed that confiscation of car and imposition of penalties on the appellants were proper. 9. Heard the parties and considered the submissions. 10. On perusal of the record and facts of the case, we find that initially the car was imported by Shri Sumit Walia in the name of Shri Tarun Kumar on 04.04.2008. We find that initially the car was imported for sale to M/s. Oswal in Ludhiana and the same was later on purchased by the Appellant No.2 on 21.04.2008. The appellant has purchased the car after the clearance from the customs as a bona fide purchaser of the car and has taken the loan of ₹ 60 lakhs for purchase of the car. In these circumstances, we hold that the appellant is a subsequent purchase of the car after importation in Ind ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ulent imports in violations of the provisions of CHALR, 2004 they have made themselves liable for Penalty under Section 112 and Section 117 of the Customs Act, 1962 as applicable. I find that in this case the show cause notice dated 24-04-2012 was earlier issued to M/s. Buhariwala Logistics through their G-Card Holder G.S. Prince. Subsequently through Addendum / Corrigendum to the Show Cause Notice dated 08-10-2013 Shri G.S. Prince, G-card holder of the CHA, M/s. Buhariwala Logistics was specifically put to notice as to why penalty should not be imposed on him for various acts of omission and commission for facilitating Sh. Sumit Walia in fraudulent import of Aston Martin Rapide car in the name of Commercial Attache of the Embassy of Vietnam and mis-declaration/ suppression of proper value of the said car. I have gone through the written oral submissions of M/s. Buhariwala Logistics that they were not involved in the said violation since, actually it was Shri G.S. Prince who facilitated and handled the clearance of the imported vehicle without the knowledge of the CHA M/s. Buhariwala Logistics. Even during the investigation stage, none of the persons involved had made a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
