TMI Blog2015 (5) TMI 1004X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... liable for penalty under Section 112(a) & 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962. Held that:- the issue is settled by the main party, before Settlement Commission. The issue is also squarely covered by the majority decision of this Tribunal in the case of S.K. Colombowala [2007 (7) TMI 514 - CESTAT, MUMBAI] , wherein this Tribunal has held that once the case is settled by the Settlement Commission, it is settled in its entirety and such a case then, cannot be adjudicated qua other co-noticees. As regards imposition of penalty under Section 112 on the co-noticee, it was held that cases against all co-notcees comes to an end once order of settlement is passed in respect of the person entitled to file an application before the Settlement Commissi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mported goods are Solar Inverters classifiable under CTH 8504 40 29 of the Customs Tariff. During the course of investigation, statements of Shri Pawan Jain, Vice President (Finance) of the importer, as well as of the appellant was recorded. In his statement recorded on 24.9.2011, Shri Pawan Jain was put to a specific question as to whether the string inverter' can be used as communication equipment of any kind , to which he answered that RS 485 Interface is a Connector used with every inverter for date communication between inverters . Since this information was also conveyed to the appellant, the goods were mis-understood as telecommunication equipment and were accordingly classified under CTH 8517 62 90. Further, Shri Jain also st ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed a penalty of ₹ 4,00,000/- on the appellant under Section 112 of the Customs Act,1962. 2.4 Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before this Tribunal. 3. The learned Counsel for the appellant submits that claiming of incorrect classification of the imported goods under CTH 85176290 as against CTH 85044029 has been construed as mis-declaration of the goods. It is evident from the fact that even the assessing group also was in doubt regarding classification of the imported goods and hence resorted to first check examination. Once the goods are subjected to first check examination, it cannot be alleged that the goods were mis-classified, as the purpose of first check is solely to ascertain this aspect. Therefore, the allega ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this Tribunal, by majority decision has held that cases against all co-noticees comes to an end once order of settlement is passed in respect of the person entitled to file an application before the Settlement Commission. Penalty imposed on the appellant under Section 112 of the Customs Act be set aside. Accordingly, he prays for setting aside the penalty imposed on the appellant and allow the appeal. 4. The learned AR appearing for the Revenue reiterates the findings of the learned Commissioner. 5. Having considered the rival contentions, I find that the issue is settled by the main party, before Settlement Commission. The issue is also squarely covered by the majority decision of this Tribunal in the case of S.K. Colombowala (supra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
