TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 757X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in appellant has to use the same for manufacture of final products. In the absence of any such manufacture, appellant could not have diverted the imported Tin Ingots & Nickel as per the DEEC licence - the duty liability upheld and interest on the said duty liability, and the penalty imposed is also correct. The penalty imposed on the individual Shri Bhanwarlal M Jain set aside and appeal allowed subject to condition that the main appellant discharges the entire Customs duty, liability and interest thereof. Appeal disposed off - decided partly in favor of appellants. - C/366 & 367/06-MUM - A/86421-86422/17/CB - Dated:- 23-2-2017 - Shri M V Ravindran, Member (Judicial) And Shri C J Mathew, Member (Technical) Shri Narendra Dave, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s further argument that if the appellant could have manufactured finished goods from this Tin Ingots Nickel and cleared for home consumption, there would have been no problem and they would not have to discharge any duty liability. As regards penalty imposed on the individual under Section 112(i) which is not correct as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of Commissioner of Customs Vs. S K Shah [2009 (245) ELT 48 (Guj.)] which have been upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner Vs S K Shah [2010 (255) ELT A50 (S.C.)]. 5. Learned Departmental Representative reiterates the findings of the lower authorities. 6. On careful consideration of the submissions made by both sides and per ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... judicating authority is not correct and is short of any cogent reasoning for imposition of penalties on individual. Learned Counsel has strong force in his submission that identical issue was before Hon'ble High Court of Gujarat in the case of S K Shah (supra) . We respectfully reproduce the entire judgment. Both these appeals have been filed by appellant revenue against employees of M/s. Narmada Cement Company Limited and M/s. Ultratech Cement Limited respectively in relation to the same transaction. In case of Ultratech Cement Limited, coal was imported under a license granted under the relevant EXIM policy and it is the case of appellant revenue that some of such imported coal was diverted to Narmada Cement Company Limited am ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
