M/S Karnail Singh vs C.C.-Amritsar

[Arising out of Order-In-Appeal No. ASR-CUSTOMS-PVR-APP-60641415 dated: 07.05.2014 passed by Commissioner (Appeals)-Chandigarh-I]

For approval and signature:

Hon'ble Mr. S.K. Mohanty, Member (Judicial)

1 Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?

2 Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?

3 Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order?

4 Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities?

M/s Karnail Singh ...Appellant

Vs.

C.C.-Amritsar Respondent

Appearance:

Ms. Saurabh Kapoor, Advocate for the Appellants

Mr. Devender Singh, DR for the Respondent

CORAM:

Hon'ble Mr. S.K. Mohanty, Member (Judicial)

Date of Hearing.11.06.2015

FINAL ORDER NO. 54075-54078 /2015

Per S. K. Mohanty (for the Bench):

The brief facts of the case are that M/s Regent Strips (P) Ltd had imported certain consignment of Rerolling & Heavy Melting Scrap and had filed 8 numbers of bills of entry for clearance of the imported consignment. Based on the declared value of imported goods, duty liability were assessed and on payment of duty, the goods were allowed clearance for home consumption. Subsequent to clearance of the goods, the Department investigated the matter and found that the signature of the Customs Officer on the said Bills of Entries have been forged and the goods covered thereunder were cleared without payment of appropriate Customs Duty. On the basis of such observations, proceedings were initiated against various persons for imposition of penalty. In this case, the appellant is an employee of CHA - M/s Unison Clearing (P) Ltd., against whom proceedings were also initiated, for imposition of penalty. The Show Cause Notices issued in this regard culminated in the Adjudication Order whereby penalties have been imposed on the noticees. Against imposition of penalty, the present appellant had filed the appeals before Commissioner (Appeals), which were disposed who vide the impugned order, in reducing the quantum of penalty to 50%. In support of reduction of penalty amount, the Commissioner (Appeals) has observed that the main accused namely, Kapil Oberoy & Ankush Khullar nowhere in their statements have stated the appellants involvement in the fraudulent activities. Further, it has also been observed that the appellant was not involved in clearance of goods without payment of duty. To prove the bonafides of the appellant, the Commissioner (Appeals) has specifically recorded in the impugned order that based on the information furnished by the appellant with regard to misuse of the CHA license, the CHA- M/s Unison has terminated the services of Sh. Pushpinder Singh. However, penalty amount has been reduced in the impugned order on the ground that the appellant was aware about the arrangements between Sh. Kapil Oberoy, Ankush Khuller & Pushpinder Singh and also shared the deal money with Pushpinder Singh.

2. From the observations made by the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order, it is evident that the appellant is not connected with preparation of the forged DEPB Scripts and also preparation of the Bills of Entry. Hence in my view, since the involvement of the appellant in the fraudulent activities have not been proved with any tangible evidence, the proceedings initiated against him for imposition of penalty will not be justified. Therefore, penalty imposed in the Adjudication order as well as confirmed in the impugned order is not legal and proper, and as such, the appeals are allowed by setting aside the impugned orders.

(Dictated and pronounced in open court)

(S.K. Mohanty)

Member(Judicial)

Neha