TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 720X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... posed is well below the threshold prescribed therein. Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - Customs Miscellaneous Application No: 86818 of 2018, Customs Appeal No: 405 of 2011, 89634 of 2018 - A/86393-86394/2019 - Dated:- 13-8-2019 - MR C J MATHEW, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) And AJAY SHARMA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Shri DD Singh, Assistant Commissioner (AR) for the appellant Shri K Jayachandran, Advocate for the respondents ORDER PER: C J MATHEW These are appeals of Revenue against order-in-original no. 01/2011-Commr dated 12th January 2011 of Commissioner of Customs Central Excise, Goa which dropped the proposals to impose penalty on the responde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have heard Learned Authorised Representative and Learned Counsel for the appellant at length. 4. We find that the penalties have been imposed under Section 112(b) of Customs Act,1962 which is applicable to Section 112. Penalty for improper importation of goods, etc.- Any person, - xxxxx (b) who acquires possession of or is in any way concerned in carrying, removing, depositing, harbouring, keeping, concealing, selling or purchasing, or in any other manner dealing with any goods which he knows or has reason to believe are liable to confiscation under section 111, shall be liable, 5. According to Learned Counsel, there has been a dela ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t is also urged that possession of the goods were taken by the respondents herein which would bring them within the ambit of section 112(b) of Customs Act, 1962. 9. Learned Counsel takes the stand that the impugned order carries a clear finding that 36.1 Apart from the above facts in favour of noticee no.3, it is also observed that in the Show Cause Notice there is no proposal to impose penalty on noticee no. 3 under section 112(b) of Customs Act, 1962. Only cause of action is discussed in the Show Cause Notice but there is no proposal for action. When the Show Cause Notice does not contain any such proposal, needless to mention that the noticee cannot be penalized. If the noticee is penalized in the absence ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... isc./116/2017-JC dated 4th April 2018 to directing that, irrespective of the nature of dispute, any matter below the threshold of ₹10,00,000 shall not be contested and all pending cases shall be withdrawn which, precludes appeal by Revenue for amounts less than this. 12. We find that in view of the decision of the Larger Bench of the Tribunal in re Steel Tubes of India Ltd to the effect that 9. As regards the second issue in reference it can be noticed that the Rule 209A pre-supposes a knowledge as to the liability of the confiscation of the goods which being transported etc. It was argued extensively by the authorized representative for the department that the expression Any person would include any ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er to punish the guilty acting behind the veil of corporation/company. If in a given situation a parcel booking clerk of the Indian Railways, in order to have some personal gain, colludes with others to book the goods without any duty paying documents (though he has knowledge that the goods have to be booked on the basis of duty paying documents) and the goods are seized by the authorities at the destination point, can the Indian Railways be penalized under the provisions of Rule 209A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944? The resounding answer would be NO as Indian Railways is not having any knowledge that the goods so booked are liable for confiscation. The booking clerk is in knowledge and hence he is liable to be penalized under the said ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... files an appeal, expects that the appellate authority would only address the grounds of appeal, made against the order impugned, and the appellant does not expect the appellate authority to go beyond the scope of appeal, and pass an order, adverse to his interest, in which event, it certainly creates a worse situation for the appellant/assessee, in his own appeal, than the order under challenge. In terms of the instructions issued by Government of India on litigation to be initiated by Revenue, penalty that could have been imposed is well below the threshold prescribed therein. 14. For the above reasons, we find no merit in the appeals of Revenue which are dismissed. (Order pronounced in the op ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
