TMI Blog2017 (7) TMI 472X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... duty liability to the customs authorities - merits in the appeal filed by the appellant in contesting the duty liability i.e. confirmed against KTL and sought to be recovered from them. Penalty u/s 112 of CA - Held that: - the adjudicating authority has erred in imposing the penalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act on the appellant inasmuch appellant has never engaged themselves in an import of goods which are liable for confiscation under the provisions of Section 111 of the Customs Act - penalty set aside. Appeal disposed off. - decided partly in favor of appellant - E/677/2002-DB - A/30743/2017 - Dated:- 12-6-2017 - Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) And Mr. Madhu Mohan Damodhar, Member (Technical) None for the Appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the same to M/s. Vijayalaxmi Enterprises; the jurisdictional Superintendent explained the provisions of Customs Bonded Warehouse to the appellant herein and the status of machinery was as if it was still abroad and out of Indian territory and the duty liability on the said goods needs to be discharged which was demanded from APSFC and Vijayalaxmi Enterprises. Show-cause notice was issued to APSFC for the demand of duty as also Vijajaya Laxmi Enterprises. In the interregnum, Vijayalaxmi Enterprises filed a Writ petition in the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh against APSFC for declaring them as purchaser of the goods and in a sale under Section 29 of the State Finance Corporation Act is not liable for the dues of the loanee, payable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ommitment before their lordships, that if any amount determined in an adjudication proceedings against the loanee i.e. KTL, it shall, out of the sale proceeds, pay the same. In our considered view, the undertaking given by APSFC the appellant herein, to the Hon'ble High Court has to be honoured by them and since the impugned order confirms the demand of duty on KTL who is the loanee originally, it was the bounden duty of the APSFC to discharge the duty liability to the customs authorities. We do not find merits in the appeal filed by the appellant in contesting the duty liability i.e. confirmed against KTL and sought to be recovered from them as per the undertaking given to the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh. On merits, we dis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
