TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 964X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r than the statement of one Shri R. Suresh to suggest the involvement of this appellant in the illegal removal of the subject container, clearly indicates that the appellant has been targeted for no reason whatsoever in this case. Further, there is no material brought on record as to the role of this appellant, i.e., act or omission, that has led to the confiscation of the prohibited goods and it is a matter of record that no goods were confiscated at all in this case on hand. It is also a matter of record that the subject container was very much in the custody of the SIIB Officers since no Bill-of-Entry was ever filed and hence, the alleged removal from the CFS could only attract act of theft under the Indian Penal Code, for which a s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was imported in container bearing number TCNU8248262 at M/s. A.S. Shipping Agencies Private Limited, Container Freight Station, No. 9, Vellalar Street, Vellapanchavadi Numbal Village, Chennai 600 077; that as on the date of the Demand-cum-Show Cause Notice, the importer had not filed Bill-of-Entry for clearance of the said cargo; that based on specific intelligence, the consignment was taken up for examination wherein it was observed that apart from stationery goods, the consignment also contained cosmetic items of various brands like MAC, HUDA BEAUTY, KYLIE, LAKME, MAYBELLINE, LOREAL, MATRIX, etc., as detailed in the table in Annexure-1 therein; that the consignment consisted of 108 cartons of stationery goods, 445 cartons of cosmetic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Five Lakhs only). It is interesting to note the observations of the Adjudicating Authority at paragraph 69 of the Order-in-Original, after considering the statements as well as records, which reads as under:- 69. In view of the above, I find that though the involvement of Shri Hari Prabhu is not proved with solid evidences but from the statement dated 29.10.2018 of Shri R. Suresh, partner of M/s. Sapthagiri Logistics and from the police investigation, I find that Shri M. Hari Prabhu has involvement in the illegal removal of subject container from M/s. A.S. Shipping Agencies Pvt. Ltd. Therefore, Shri M. Hari Prabhu has rendered himself liable to a penalty under Sec. 112(b) of Customs Act, 1962. However, there is no material on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... subject container, clearly indicates that the appellant has been targeted for no reason whatsoever in this case. 7.2 Further, there is no material brought on record as to the role of this appellant, i.e., act or omission, that has led to the confiscation of the prohibited goods and it is a matter of record that no goods were confiscated at all in this case on hand. It is also a matter of record that the subject container was very much in the custody of the SIIB Officers since no Bill-of-Entry was ever filed and hence, the alleged removal from the CFS could only attract act of theft under the Indian Penal Code, for which a separate police complaint was lodged and the Revenue has not placed before me the current status of the said compla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
