Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Home Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles News Highlights
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Commissioner of Customs (Export Promotion) , Mumbai Versus AK Chaudhary

2017 (4) TMI 781 - CESTAT MUMBAI

Imposition of penalties u/s 114(iii) of the CA, 1962 - valuation - T-Shirts and ladies night gowns - Revenue's case is that there was surreptitious clearance for exports and the three individuals, who are respondents in this appeal, were responsible officers of the customs department and they have allowed the consignments to be cleared without conducting proper checking - Held that: - There is nothing in the statements which indicates that these officers were asked questions about various shippi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

2 - appeal rejected - decided against Revenue. - C/1221/2006 - A/86314/17/CB - Dated:- 19-1-2017 - Shri M V Ravindran, Member (Judicial) And Shri C J Mathew, Member (Technical) Shri S J Sahu, Superintendent (AR) for the appellant None for the respondent Per: M V Ravindran This appeal is filed by the Revenue against Order-in-Original CAO No: 88/2005/CAC/CC/NRN dated 30/09/2005 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (E.P.), Mumbai. 2. None appeared on behalf of the respondent. Since the matter is o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

said shipping bills. It is claimed by the Revenue in the show cause notice that those goods were overvalued. Investigation was carried out and show cause notices were issued. During the course of investigation the individuals, who are respondents in these appeals, were also subjected to recording of statements as to the clearance of T-shirts covered under the various shipping bills. Subsequently, an addendum/corrigendum to the show cause notice was issued wherein these three individuals were di .....

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 Revenue in this appeal memorandum that these three people need to be penalized. 5. Learned Authorised Representatives takes us through the show cause notice dated 10th June 2003 and also corrigendum issued on 12th July 2004 and submits that the original show-cause notice dated 10th June 2003 had clearly brought on record that there was surreptitious clearance for exports and the three individuals, who are respondents in this appeal, were responsible officers of the customs department and .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

which were not covered under the original show cause notice. 6. Considered the submissions made by the learned AR and perused the records. 7. On perusal of the first show cause notice dated 10th June 2003 we find, though the show-cause notice records that the statements were recorded of these three individuals (who are respondents herein), were officers of customs, there is no allegations in the said show-cause notice seeking any explanation from the respondents. The statements clearly indicate .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rged for imposition of penalties under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962. The addendum dated 12th July 2014 which is issued to the three officers herein needs to be reproduced and reads as under. In the Show Cause Notice of even number dated 10.6.2003 issued under section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962, on the above subject, after Para 20, the following para shall be inserted: 20(A). Shri A.K. Choudhary, the then Deputy Commissioner of Customs, Shri K.K. Sharma, Supdt.(Preventive) and Shri M.V. .....

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 Customs Act, 1962 8. It can be seen from the above reproduced addendum that the said addendum sought explanation from the respondents herein as to the surreptitious clearance of shipping bills Nos.5227082, 5227084 and 5227085. The adjudicating authority has specifically recorded that the show cause notice had called upon the officers to explain their conduct in respect of only these three shipping bills and on factual verification of the documents on record, it is recorded that the goods .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

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


|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version