Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2023 (5) TMI 937

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... and the appellant also visited to Kolkata. Therefore, after meeting with the concerned person and knowing that there is a DRI alert, the appellant informed the importer that he could not do anything and further told that if it was known to him that there is a DRI alert, the appellant could not have come to Kolkata also. This part of the statement has not been denied by the Revenue and no other statement or evidence has come on record that the appellant was involved in the clearance of the above said consignments which were mis-declared and under-valued. The act of action of the appellant is only under bonafide belief. Thus, no penalty is imposable on the appellant. Therefore, the penalty imposed on the appellant is set aside - appeal all .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... , is one M/s Modern Agency and two consignments were already cleared. Remaining four consignments were examined and found that the goods have been mis-declared and undervalued. It was found that these are branded goods, which amounting the case of suppression and smuggling. All the consignments were seized on the reasonable believe that the said consignments were imported with intention to evade payment of Customs duty misdeclaring those to a different materials of low value. No request for provisional release from the importer was made. It was further revealed that the office premises of the importer was found closed and unoccupied. Shri Sailendra Singh was found at his residential address, which is occupied by him having 4/5 members and h .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Sameer Sharma. 12.14.5 He last came to Kolkata on 23.08.2017 and stayed there up to 27.08.2017 along with Shri Manoj Singhal, D.K. Jain and Sameer Sharma. 12.14.6 Manoj Singhal introduced himself as the importer of electronic parts and LED lights and also has a factory of Electric lights etc. Manoj Singhal has a shop n the name of Maha Laxmi Electric at Bhagirath Place, Delhi. 12.14.7 Manoj Singhal came to his office in August 2017 and sought his help regarding clearance of one import consignment of unbranded shoes in Kolkata which were struck up for some technical issue in Customs Kolkata. 12.14.8 Manoj Singhal requested him to talk to his CHA Mr. Laxman (Modern Agency). He talked but issue could not be solved. 12.14.9 Ma .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... DRI office and after returning from there they informed that nothing fruitful had happened there and the officer was asked to leave the DRI office. 12.14.19 Next day Sameer Sharma and D.K.Jain left for Delhi and the day after next day, he and Manoj singhal also left for Delhi. 12.14.20 The flight cost and hotel hills were borne by Manoj Singhal in cash and the payment of hotel was made by Sameer Sharma with the money given to him by Manoj Singhal. 12.14.21 He drew conclusion that the consignments were imported by Manoj Singhal. He did not know the IEC holder of M/s ASS Tradcom in whose name the consignments were imported. 12.14.22 Manoj Singhal had substantial interest in those consignments. 12.14.23 He identified a picture a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... randed shoes in Kolkata, who requested him to talk to his CHA, Mr.Laxman (Modern Agency) and the appellant, inter alia, told him that he could not do anything for clearance of said consignments and nothing incriminating had been found against the appellant and none of the co-noticee has given any incriminating statement for the appellant. In that circumstances, penalty under Section 112 (a) (b) of the Customs Act, 1962, is not imposable. 4. The ld.A.R. for the Revenue, reiterated the findings of the impugned order. 5. Heard the parties and considered the submissions. 6. We have gone through the statement of the appellant recorded during the course of investigation. From going through the said statement, it is clear that the impor .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates