2016 (7) TMI 412

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he intention of that section. - Held that:- When the magnitude of the penalty is looked into there appears no further consideration to be made since the appellant through e-mail transaction has stepped up into the shoe to benefit his client importer. Appellant’s involvement was consciously and knowingly which cannot be ruled out. Law is well settled that fraud is a nullity and should get burial de .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ural person since the word person is used by that section. Further, learned Commissioner (Appeals) did not consider no involvement of this appellant in the entire undervaluation process. The appellant not having subscribed his signature to any fraudulent document, he should not be liable to penalty. If at all any penalty is imposable that shall be imposed under section 114AA on the employee but no .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... l avoid penal consequence of law when any breach of law comes to notice of Revenue to believe that the same was done by a person in disguise of a business concern. Therefore the plea of person fails when penalties were imposed against two different breach of law alleged. 6. When the magnitude of the penalty is looked into there appears no further consideration to be made since the appellant thr .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X