TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Penalties under Customs Act linked to duty, not differential duty, court affirms.</h1> <h3>Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore Versus M/s 3d Networks Pvt. Ltd. (Now M/s. Wipro Ltd.) M/s Gokul Jewellers</h3> Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore Versus M/s 3d Networks Pvt. Ltd. (Now M/s. Wipro Ltd.) M/s Gokul Jewellers - TMI Issues:- Whether penalty under Section 114A of Customs Act should be equal to duty determined plus interest as contended by the appellants.Analysis:The judgment pertains to two appeals filed by the Revenue challenging the Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals). The main issue in consideration was the quantum of penalty under Section 114A of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellants argued that the penalty should be equal to the duty determined plus interest. However, the learned adjudicating authority had imposed penalties equal to the differential duty determined in the impugned order. Section 114A allows for the levy of penalty equal to the duty or interest payable in cases involving collusion, willful misstatement, or suppression of facts.The learned Commissioner (Appeals) analyzed Section 114A and concluded that the penalty should indeed be equal to the duty or interest determined. This decision was supported by a Tribunal ruling in the case of Bharathi Airtel Ltd. & Others Vs. C.C., Bangalore. The Tribunal in that case highlighted that the interest payable depends not only on the duty determined but also on the actual date of payment, making it difficult to ascertain the exact interest amount at the time of adjudication. Therefore, imposing penalties equal to the duty determined was deemed appropriate.Additionally, the Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of C. Ex., Cus. & S.T., Bangalore-I Vs. B. Suresh Vasudev Baliga dismissed appeals filed by the Revenue on the same issue, following the precedent set by the Bharathi Airtel Ltd. case. Based on the consistent rulings of the Tribunal, the judge in this case found no merit in the Revenue's appeals and consequently dismissed both appeals.In conclusion, the judgment clarifies the application of Section 114A of the Customs Act regarding the quantum of penalty in cases involving duty determination and interest payment. The decision aligns with previous Tribunal rulings and establishes a precedent for determining penalties in such scenarios.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
