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

2015 (11) TMI 1322 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2015 (11) TMI 1322 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - TMI - Levy of penalty for abetting in Evasion of duty - import of newsprint at concessional rate of duty of 5% under Notification No. 21/2002 Cus - Held that:- Show Cause Notice brings out their role and required them to show cause as to why they should not be penalised under Section 112 of Customs Act, 1962. The impugned goods were imported at the behest of the proprietor of the appellants. The fact that the proprietor of the appellants paid ₹ 28 la .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d the smuggling of impugned goods which were liable to confiscation and was purchasing the said newsprint imported at concessional rate of duty. Thus, the appellants are clearly liable to penalty - Decided in favour of Revenue. - Appeal Nos.C/209 & 210/2009-CU[DB] - Final Order Nos.52549-52550/2015 - Dated:- 29-7-2015 - Mr. G. Raghuram, President And Mr. R.K. Singh, Member (Technical) For the Respondent : Ms. Suchitra Sharma, DR ORDER Per Mr. R.K. Singh : These appeals have been filed against pe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

me of non-functional small-time newspaper publishers and such imported newsprint was sold in the open market while the concessional rate of duty was applicable only on actual user condition. In this case imports were made in the name of Jai Sai Times and the Bills of Entry were filed in the name of Jai sai Times and the RNI certificate was issued in the name and favour of Shri G Devendiran proprietor of M/s Jai Sai Times and Sewa Times, who inter alia admitted in his statement recorded under Sec .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ne Chartered Accountant sent by Sh. Moovandan had come with him that day who could tell about the import of goods; that he had not placed any order for any import; that he had nothing to do with the imported consignments. 3. When the case was called for hearing, the advocate on record stated that he had no instructions to appear. Thus, none appeared on behalf of the appellants. In the Memorandum of Appeals, the appellants have contended that they are not the importers and therefore no customs du .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ary adjudicating authority while confirming the demand of customs duty, inter alia imposed penalties of ₹ 5 lakh each on these two appellants after discussing their role in para 37 of the primary adjudication order which is reproduced below:- 37. Regarding remaining two noticees M/s. Shivam Newsprint Agency (Noticee No.3) and M/s. K. Shyam International (Noticee No.4), it is observed from the available records of the case that the proprietor of both these firms is Sh. M.L. Gupta. In the de .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tiary value. As is evident from the available records of the case, imports by M/s Jai Sai Times were made basically to meet the orders placed on M/s. Jai Sai Times and their sister firms M/s. Seva Times by two firms of Sh. M.L. Gupta, i.e., M/s. Shivam Newsprint Agency and M/s K. Shyam International. It is further observed that Sh. M.L. Gupta had at one point of time agreed to pay the differential duty worked out in respect of consignments that were purchased by his firms from M/s Jai Sai Times .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ains that it was Sh. M.L. Gupta and his firms who were purchasing the goods imported by M/s Jai Sai Times at concessional rate of duty for further trading in the market. Since Sh. M.L. Gupta, by his own admission, was in the business of trading in papers for long, he should and could have found it out as to whether or not the duty liability had been fully and correctly discharged by the importer from whom he was purchasing the imported goods, especially when the firms of Sh. M.L. Gupta were 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

. G. Devendiran and his firms to indulge in such activities that have rendered the goods in question liable to confiscation under section 111 of Customs Act, 1962. M/s. Shivam Newsprint Agency (Noticee No.3) and M/s. K. Shyam International (Noticee No.4), proprietor of which is Sh. M.L. Gupta are therefore liable to penal action under Section 112 of Customs Act, 1962. Held accordingly. 6. No demand of duty has been confirmed against the appellants. Only penalty is imposed upon them. Their conten .....

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