9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (5) TMI 1041X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t part of the order dated 31.12.2022 passed by the Principal Commissioner of Customs, ACC (Import), New Delhi the Principal Commissioner that imposes a penalty of Rs. 10 Lakhs upon him as Chief Financial and Technology Officer of M/s. MMTC-Pamp India Pvt. Ltd. under section 112(a)(ii) of the Customs Act, 1962 the Customs Act. 2. Section 112(a)(ii) of the Customs Act deals with penalty for improper importation of goods and provides that any person who, in relation to any goods, does or omits to do any act which act or omission would render such goods liable to confiscation under section 111, or abets the doing or omission of such an act, shall be liable in the case of dutiable goods, other than prohibited goods, subject to the provisions of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f evading involves a conscious exercise by the person who evades. To say that one has sought to evade, that person should be found to have tried to find way to evade or had aimed at evading, or had resorted to evading, for, "sought" is the past tense and past participle of the word "seek". Therefore, the process of "seeking to evade" essentially involves a mental element and the concept of the status "sought to be evaded" is arrived at only by a conscious attempt to evade. Considerable support to this view can be found in the decisions of the Apex Court in Jain Exports Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India - 1990 (47) E.L.T. 213 (S.C.) and in Akbar Badruddin Jiwani v. Collector - 1990 (47) E.L.T. 161 (S.C.). Therefore, the conclusion is inescapable t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ound to be more, the appellant would have short paid customs duty but in cases where the gold content has been found to be less, the appellant would have paid more customs duty. It is for this reason the appellant has claimed refund of the excess customs duty, which is clear from the following chart: ***** 31. It is also a fact that the appellant had also claimed refund of customs duty to the extent of Rs. 113,97,35,837/- on 22.04.2024 on account of excess duty payment in respect of provisionally assessed 300 Bills of Entry filed from December 2019 to October 2023 and by an order dated 08.10.2024, the Assistant Commissioner (Refund) sanctioned refund. The relevant portion of the order is reproduced below: ***** 32. Similar refund orders ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
