TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 177X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roper that any leniency in reduction of penalty will be a bonus to breach of law and that shall be an inspiration to the perpetrator of offence - Appeal dismissed. - Appeal No. C/40895/2016 - Final Order No. 42043 / 2016 - Dated:- 21-10-2016 - Shri D.N. Panda, Judicial Member Mrs. J. Ragini, Advocate for the Appellant Shri K. Veerabhadra Reddy, JC (AR) for the Respondent ORDER Appellant says that this appellant although was in the chain of import linking the importer and the CHA, he has no role to cause evasion of duty. Therefore, levy of penalty of ₹ 4,50,000/- each under section 112(a) and Section 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962 is unwarranted and unjustified. 2. Revenue on the other hand says that when there ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that he was the perpetuator of fraud guiding the importer to import 50% prime material and 50% stock lot and mixing the same in the agent s warehouse in China as well as to import that to suffer duty to the extent of ₹ 6 to 7 lakhs per container. (h) The appellant was in the business of freight forwarding and has conscious knowledge about the nature of the goods, as well as impact thereof on the import duty. 5. The evidence as above came to record did not detach the appellant from his hand in glove in commitment of offence in absence of any evidence to the contrary led by appellant. Accordingly, commitment of breach of law by the appellant under section 112(a) of Customs Act, 1962 has been established being intimately conce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on independently. 7. While passing the above order, the quantum aspect has been examined repeatedly with the gravity of offence committed. On the basis of evidence, material facts and attendant circumstances, it is considered proper that any leniency in reduction of penalty will be a bonus to breach of law and that shall be an inspiration to the perpetrator of offence. The authority having exercised his authority most reasonably, following the ratio laid down by Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai Vs. Mansi Impex reported in 2011 (270) ELT 631 (SC), no reduction of penalty under any of the sections is considered proper. 8. In the result, appeal is dismissed in toto. ( Dictated and pronounced in open ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
