TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 1122X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... endered the goods liable for confiscation and himself to penal action - demand of duty upheld. Penalty - Held that:- The Department has not been able to establish aiding and abetting on the part of the appellant so as to justify the imposition of penalty of ₹ 10,000/- on the appellant - Penalty set aside. Appeal allowed in part. - C/265/2008-DB - Final Order No. 21170 / 2018 - Dated:- 17-8-2018 - HON'BLE MR. S.S GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER And HON'BLE MR. P. ANJANI KUMAR, TECHNICAL MEMBER None For the Appellant Mrs. Kavitha Poduwal, Superintendent (AR) For the Respondent ORDER Per : S. S. Garg The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 31.01.2008 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as also ordered that an option to redeem the confiscated goods on payment of redemption fine of ₹ 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) and also imposed a personal penalty of ₹ 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) on the appellant. Aggrieved by the said order, appellant filed appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who rejected the appeal. Hence the present appeal. 2. None appeared for the appellant but he has submitted written submissions. He requested that the matter be decided on merit. Heard the learned DR. 3. We have gone through the written submissions filed by the learned counsel for the appellant wherein he submitted that the impugned order is not sustainable in law as the same has been passed without properly appr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has considered all the evidences of the appellant and has recorded the findings which is reproduced herein below: As regards the manufactured goods acquired by Mr. S.R. Sreedhar, it is seen that he was working as an engineer with M/s. Alpha Rich Granites Pvt. Ltd. since its inception and he was aware that the entire imported goods were being sold illegally to various customers and he was also aware that it was not legally correct to purchase manufactured goods from the factory premises without payment of duty. He was privy to the entire activities of the unit and he should have verified the genuineness of the transaction before purchasing the said goods and also should have ensured that duty is paid on clearance from the EOU. Mr. Sree ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
