TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 78X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e not found complicity on the part of the present appellant. Rather it is the finding that Mr. Vinod Kumar Bansal in collusion with Mr. Vinod Kumar Garg of Veekay Poly Coats Ltd., imported and diverted the PVC-resins, in violation of the conditions of the Advance Authorisation Licence. This appellant, being an employee, only accepted directorship of the two companies under instructions of his employer, and was not personally involved. The penalty under Section 112 is reduced to ₹ 50,000/- - appeal allowed in part. - Customs Appeal No.496 of 2010-Customs (DB) - Final Order No. 50758/2019 - Dated:- 31-5-2019 - MR. ANIL CHOUDHARY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) And MR. BIJAY KUMAR, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) Shri Prabhu Dayal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .53 crores against the factory land from Punjab State Industrial Corporation and also₹ 75 lakhs from UCO Bank, Chandigarh in the year 2002. Shri Vinod Kumar Bansal was the Chairman of DPPL for about 3 months and thereafter, resigned, and continued to work as General Manager. This appellant was employee/Director for sometime and he resigned from Directorship w.e.f. 15.03.2004, and at the relevant time, shri S. Bhardwaj was appointed as Managing Director w.e.f. 15.3.2004 in DPPL. Thereafter, vide a further change in Partnership, Shri Dharamvir Bansal was appointed as Managing-cum-wholetime Director w.e.f 20.04.2004. Shri Dharamvir Bansal has sworn an affidavit dated 13.06.2005 before the Executive Magistrate, stating that he is the Mana ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... civil suite no.192 of 2009 on 24.03.2009 before the Addl. Civil Judge, Senior Judge, Derabassi, Punjab against the said Dollar Poly Pipes and Shri Dharam Vir Bansal, has declared that this appellant is not responsible for any liability of the said company Dollar Poly Pipes, and restrained the director of the said Dollar Poly Pipes from referring the creditors to appellant, by way of permanent injunction held that this appellant is not responsible for any type of liability on behalf of the said Dollar Poly Pipes, as he is not more Director of the Company since 15.03.2004. 5. There was another company viz. Shivalik Plastichem India Ltd.. which was involved in similar activities, controlled by the said Mr. V.K. Bansal, in whic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at he is not responsible for any kind of liability of the defunct company Swastik Plastichem India Ltd., as he was no longer Director of the said company w.e.f. 2.7.2004. 7. The brief facts are that one Shri V.K. Bansal was the master mind and person behind these two companies viz Dollor Poly Pipes (India) Ltd. and Shivalik Plastichem (India) Ltd., who obtained advance scrips authorization for free importation of goods (raw materials), which were supposed to be used in the manufacture of finished Products and after manufacture to be exported and to achieve net foreign exchange earning. However, the said Shri Vinod Kumar Bansal in collusion with one Shri Vinod Kumar Garg, Managing Director of Veekay Poly Coats Ltd., Gurgaon i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt were required to show cause on the penalty be not imposed should not be imposed under Section 112 (a) and (b) read with Section 114 A of the Customs Act. 10. The Adjudicating Authority took notice that Shri Vinod Kumar Garg, Managing Director of Veekay Polycoats Ltd., had approached the Settlement Commission with respect to imports though ICD, Tughlakabad, by these two companies and had got settled the disputes by paying duty with interest and penalty, as fixed by the Settlement Commission, vide Final Order No.F-704/2-7 (SC) PB dated 20.12.2007. Further, the Settlement Commission have granted immunity from prosecution. 11. In the proceedings before the Adjudicating Authority, the present appellant appeared a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in statement recorded Mr. Vinod Kumar Bansal have stated that Bank Guarantee was forged by them, (him and the present appellant). Further, urges that penalty imposed is just and proper. 13. Having considered the rival contentions, I find that the present appellant resigned from directorship of both the companies in April-June, 2004, on coming to know of the nefarious activity and intention of Mr. Vinod Kumar Bansal. Further, I find that the Addl. DGFT, New Delhi have in appellate orders, mentioned hereinabove, ordered deletion of name of this appellant from the adjudication orders, with respect to the disputed Advances Authorisation Licenses . Further, I find that the adjudicating authority have not found complicity on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
