TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 1443X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellants of lack of motive was discarded on the finding of benefits derived from transacting in foreign exchange - Notwithstanding this, the culmination of penalty under section 112 of Customs Act, 1962 commenced from confiscation of the goods as a consequence of admitted mis-declaration in which the motives are not relevant. The benefits that may have accrued to the appellants through misuse of foreign exchange transactions was brought to nought and as the misdemeanour is limited to the act of mis-declaration, the penalty on Shri Hemrajani be reduced to ₹ 5,00,000 and that on Ms Veena Mishra to ₹ 1,00,000 - appeal allowed in part. - CUSTOMS APPEAL NO: 976 of 2010, 977 of 2010 - A/85763-85764/2019 - Dated:- 18-4-2019 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 962 but allowed to be redeemed on payment of fine, also imposed penalties under section 112 of Customs Act, 1962. It is the penalty of ₹ 20,00,000 on the Managing Director and ₹ 15,00,000 on the General Manager that is assailed here. 3. It is contended on behalf of the appellants that the Managing Director was not connected with the day to day transactions and certainly not of the imports. It is contended that none of the statements recorded in the proceedings have cast any aspersions on his role. It is also submitted that the scheme of Export Processing Zones, requiring units to obtain approval as private bonded warehouses which were operated under double lock , precludes any misuse of imported goods. There is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 111 and section 112 of Customs Act, 1962 even if it could be said to impact the quantum of fine and penalties. We are not certain about the applicability of the said decision to justify the visiting of penal consequence on every wrongly declared import transaction as the conclusions therein appear to the consequence of certain factual circumstances including acceptance of the reports of the laboratories and the plea for release of goods on revised assessment. 6. Neither are we convinced that the decisions cited on behalf of the appellants would stand them in good stead. The detriment of fine and penalties were erased in re Guru Ispat Ltd on the basis of judicial determination that ordering of re-export could not be condi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his, the culmination of penalty under section 112 of Customs Act, 1962 commenced from confiscation of the goods as a consequence of admitted mis-declaration in which the motives are not relevant. The decision of Enforcement Directorate was specific to the context of proceedings under Foreign Exchange Regulations Act, 1973. 8. The pleas of the appellants do not justify any alteration of the findings in the impugned order. However, in the light of the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in re Pine Chemical Suppliers that mens rea may have a bearing on the quantum of penalty, we hold that as the benefits that may have accrued to the appellants through misuse of foreign exchange transactions was brought to nought and as the m ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
