9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 796X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of misappropriation of customs duty came to the knowledge of the Senior Officers of the Customs Department in the month of February, 2012. Appellants have imported cement under valid import licence through Authorised Land Customs Station. The bill of imports were duly recorded in the Bills of Lading in Bangladesh Land Customs Station and were also recorded in the bills of entry register at the Land Customs Station, Khowaighat, Tripura. It is the case of the appellants that the misappropriation of government revenue was not against the importers but against the officers posted at the Land Customs Station, Khowaighat during the period under investigation. The Commissioner vide individual adjudication orders passed the following Order: "In Ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in terms of Section 28AB/28AA of the Customs Act, 1962. 9. I impose a penalty of Rs. 7,06,055 (Rupees seven lakh six thousand fifty five) only on Shri Nitish Ranjan Paul under Section 114A of the Customs Act, 1962. 10. I impose a penalty of Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakh) only on Shri Nitish Ranjan Paul under Section 112(b)(ii) of the Customs Act, 1962. 11. I do not order confiscation of the imported goods in the instant case since the same had already been cleared long back and not available for confiscation" "In Appeal No.C/76088/2015, Appellant: Shri Shyamal Ghosh, Order-in-Original No.CCP/NER/10/2015 dated 27.08.2015, Show Cause Notice dated 23.01.2015. Order 7. I Confirm the demand of Customs duties amounting to Rs. 4,15 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es were issued alleging that the appellants did not pay the duties of customs in respect of cement imported by them during the period from 01.04.2010 to 31.03.2012 by way of collusion, wilful misstatement and suppression of facts. Ld. Advocate strongly argued that the show cause notice was issued for non-payment of customs duty of cement which were imported through Balla Land Customs Station, Bangladesh to Land Customs Station, Khowaighat, Tripura, India. During the investigation of relevant documents including bills of entry for the period 2009-2010, 2010-2011, 2011-2012 and also bills of lading the same were taken into custody by the Customs Authority towards investigating the matter and the appellants were informed that the documents wer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l Ghosh imported cement/crush stone since 2010 against advance TT. About 13 advance TT he had sent to Bangladesh. Some Bill of Entries he produced as proof of import but not all. He stated that Customs Officers had not given all the Bill of Entries. He used to pay Customs Duty in cash against TR-5 Challan, but he had not received the counterfoil of TR-5 Challan. (iii) Shri Sanjit Ranjan Paul engaged in import business since 2009-2010. He used to import Cement, Plastic Door, Iron Rod, Bricks and stone chips. His bank in India used to sent advance TT on his request. As a proof import he used to produce Bill of Entries, Truck Challan, Commercial Invoice to Banks. He had produced all proof of import to his bank. He used to pay custom duty agai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ruary. This fact has to be verified with the overseas enquiry report. The number of imported consignments missing i.e. not recorded in the official reports and quantum of Revenue involved in the missing, non-recorded consignments is to be quantified after receipt of Bangladesh documents. The Sepoy had identified at least 04(four) forged Bill of entries and also identified the handwriting written in the duty realised portion of the Bill of entries but he did not identify the initial there. He had written it in the office itself and the initial put there appears to have been put by one of the three persons at the LCS i.e. Inspector, the Sepoy or the Farash which may be verified by FSL test. He cannot shirk his responsibility in this regard. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se. 8. I find that it is evident from the final enquiry report filed by the Additional Commissioner, Customs and it is quite surprising to note that there is nothing on record in the hands of the officers posted at Khowaighat LCS to prove the case and all documents are only to be obtained from the Bangladesh customs department but most unfortunately till date nothing has been received from the Bangladesh Customs. Such plea as adopted herein is not at all tenable in the eye of law. 9. I find that there is nothing on record to show what disciplinary action has been taken by the customs department against the officers who were on duty during the period when such irregularities and infirmities in maintenance of Government records took place. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
