Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Natwar Dalmia, LA Grande Projects Versus Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise, Goa

2016 (8) TMI 830 - CESTAT KOLKATA

Imposition of penalty under Sec 112(a) of the Customs Act 1962 – import of diesel engines – 100% EOU – ITC bond – re-warehousing certificate – Held that: - appellant Natwar Dalmia is not any office bearer of La Grande and has not signed any Customs documents. His statement has also not been recorded by the department. The findings given by the Adjudicating authority is Shri Natwar Dalmia & his family have orchestrated the whole fraud with the sole intention of selling the good. No findings have .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

l ) Shri K.K. Anand, Advocate for the Appellant Shri K. C. Jena, ADC (AR) for the Respondent ORDER Per Shri H. K. Thakur Appeal NO. C/350/1998 has been filed by appellant La Grande Projects Ltd (La Grande) and appeal No. C/688/1999 has been filed by appellant Sh. Natwar Dalmia who is the father of Sh. Aditya Dalmia, one of the Director of appellant La Grande Projects Ltd. Both these appeals have been filed with respect to OIO No. 22/99-COMMR dt 22/11/97 passed by Commissioner of Customs & Ce .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of the appellant was recorded by the investigation and has been implicated only on the basis of statements of Directors of Appellant La Grande. That appellant La Grande imported 1620 Diesel engines at Marmagoa Port and filed requisite bills of entry as capital goods meant for their 100% EOU at Partapura, Tikamgarh M.P. That though the imported engines were required for the said 100% EOU but appellant La Grande paid ₹ 35,90,782/- (Basic Custom) & ₹ 17,39,840/- (CVD). That 20 conta .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t the case made at Mumbai for the same goods and on the same issue was adjudicated by Commissioner of Customs-II, Mumbai under OIO CAO/ No. 155/96 CAC/ CCI dt 18/12/96. That under OIO dt 18/12/96 no penalty was imposed upon any of the noticees including Natwar Dalmia and only a penalty of ₹ 5 lakh was imposed on La Grande. That Revenue filed appeal with CESTAT Mumbai, interalia , on the grounds that penalty on Ritu Dalmia and Natwar Dalmia was required to be imposed. That appeal of the Rev .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

/ WZB/05/CI dt 18/7/2008 dt 18/7/2005 CESTAT dismissed the appeal of the Revenue asking for interalia, imposition of penalty upon Natwar Dalmia. That the case against the appellant decided by CC Indore was finally disposed by CESTAT Delhi as per case law La Grande Projects Ltd Vs CC Indore [2005 (192) ELT 874 (Tri-Del)] where no penalty upon Sh. Natwar Dalmia was imposed by the Adjudicating authority. That facts & evidences in all the three cases at Mumbai, Indore & Goa are identical. 3. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

(AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue argued that imported goods were cleared under ITC bond and re-warehousing certificate was not produced by La Grande. That Natwar Dalmia was the brain behind the entire fraud as stated by Sh. Aditya Dalmia & Sh. B.D. Ghosh both Directors of La Grande. Learned AR made the bench go through Pares 6 & 7, on internal pages 3 to 10 of the OIO dt 22/11/97, to argue that final decisions in the imports of impugned good, were taken by Natwar Dalmia. That Adju .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

roduced below:- SECTION 112. Penalty for improper importation of goods, etc,- Any person,- (a) Who, in relation to any goods, does or omits to do any act which act or omission would render such goods liable to confiscation under section 111, or abets the doing or omission of such an act, or……………. . 5.1. It is the case of this appellant that similar proceedings for the import of diesel engines imported by appellant La Grande were initiated by the department at M .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r the appeal was finally decided by CESTAT Delhi as per case law La Grande Projects Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Indore [2005 (192) ELT 874 (Tri-Del)]. Learned Advocate made the bench go through the case records as mentined in Para- 3.1 above of this order. 5.2. In the case of Abhay Oswal vs. CCE, Ludhiana (Supra), up held by P&H High Court, following observations have been made by CESTAT Delhi in Para-6 6. It is well settled that the rights and obligations of a limited company are 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

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| 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