Appellant's Involvement in Fraudulent Export Activities Results in Penalty Reduction

The Tribunal upheld the appellant's involvement in fraudulent export activities, reducing the penalty from Rs. 10 lakhs to Rs. 2 lakhs due to her financial circumstances. Despite her assertion of coercion by the employer, the Tribunal found her aware of the offenses and liable for the penalty.

---

---

Issues:
- Imposition of penalty under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962 on the appellant.

Analysis:
The appeal was made against the imposition of a penalty of Rs. 10 lakhs on the appellant under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellant, who was a steno typist, became the proprietor of a new firm named M/s. Bhai Bhim Raj Trading House, which was involved in export fraud. The Commissioner held that the appellant, along with two others, engaged in exporting sub-standard garments at inflated values to claim drawback amounts. The Commissioner ordered the recovery of the drawback and imposed a penalty of Rs. 10 lakhs on the appellant.

The appellant contended that she was merely an employee who followed the instructions of her employer and was not involved in the fraudulent activities. However, the Departmental Representative argued that the appellant had full knowledge of the fraudulent export activities and provided detailed accounts of the operations. The appellant's voluntary statement also revealed her involvement in the entire process from procurement to export.

After considering the submissions and evidence, the Tribunal found that the appellant was aware of the fraudulent activities and her defense of being coerced by her employer was not accepted. The Tribunal noted that even if an employee follows the employer's orders in committing a crime, they are not immune from penal consequences. Therefore, the Tribunal upheld the appellant's involvement in the offense.

However, considering the appellant's poor financial status and the overall circumstances of the case, the Tribunal decided to reduce the penalty imposed from Rs. 10 lakhs to Rs. 2 lakhs. The appeal was partly allowed, and the reduced penalty amount was finalized at Rs. 2 lakhs.

In conclusion, the Tribunal acknowledged the appellant's involvement in the fraudulent activities despite her claims of coercion by the employer. The penalty was reduced based on the appellant's financial situation, but her liability for the offense was established and upheld.

---