Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the appellants were liable to penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 for importation made through an unauthorised authorisation against a non-transferable additional licence, and whether the penalty imposed required reduction.
Analysis: Section 112(a) fastens liability on any person concerned with importation who does or omits to do an act, or abets such act or omission, in relation to confiscable goods. Under Para 118(2) of the Hand Book of Import-Export Procedures, 1985-88, an Export House holding a non-transferable additional licence could not appoint an agent or issue a letter of authority for operating the licence or importing goods against it without prior permission of the competent authority. The authorisation given to the importer was therefore contrary to the import policy. The appellants could not avoid liability merely by describing the arrangement as a power of attorney, since the executant remained involved in the unauthorised importation. At the same time, the circumstances justified interference with the quantum of penalty.
Conclusion: The penalty under Section 112(a) was sustained, but the amount was reduced from Rs. 2 lakhs to Rs. 50,000, resulting in partial relief to the appellants.