TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2009 (10) TMI 239
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the concerned CHA involved in non-payment of the customs duty in respect of the impugned consignments and other allegations such as substitution of the goods in the warehouse and filing of warehouse bond with forged signature etc. Sh. S. Murugappan, learned Advocate appearing for these appeals states that the consignments in question relate to clearances from the air cargo complex. He points out that in the statement before the customs authorities, the appellant had stated that though he worked with the CHA involved in these cases he was handling only Bills of Entries relating to Sea Customs. Shri S. Murugappan, learned Advocate argues that in view of the fact that the appellant was not dealing with the air customs cargo he cannot be penal....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e remanded to the adjudicating Commissioner for fresh orders. We order accordingly and allow these six appeals by way of remand. The adjudicating Commissioner shall allow a reasonable opportunity of hearing before passing a fresh order. C/357-361/2002 4. Shri T. Ramesh, learned Advocate appearing for the appellant states that the appellant was only a driver for the proprietor CHA. He has not acted on his own and he has only done whatever was told to him to be done by his employer. As such, the appellant not being concerned with the duty evasion and non-payment of the customs duty to the customs treasury should be exonerated and no penalty should be imposed on him. He further states that the appellant is unemployed and is a poor person and....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rgo in the warehouse. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the entire case, we are of the opinion that the appellant cannot be exonerated of his involvement in the offence. At the same time, considering the fact that he was only a low paid employee, we are of the view that ends of justice will be met if the penalties imposed on him in all these five cases are reduced to a total of Rs.50,000/-. We order accordingly and reduce the penalties to Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only). All these five appeals are thus partly allowed by reduction in the penalty. C/384/2002 7. Shri S. Murugappan appearing on behalf of the importer appellant states that the adjudicating Commissioner has already latched the duty liability in respect of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n-duty paid imported cargo. She states that the customs duty amount has not been deposited either by themselves or by their CHA in the customs treasury for the clearance of the impugned cargo. Hence it is the liability of the importers to pay the duty. She also states that the CBI investigation is going on in respect of these cases involving non­payment of customs duty, non-warehousing of the imported goods, substitution of the imported goods by placing limestone powder in the warehouse etc. which will bring to light the exact role of all the players involved in this customs fraud. 9. After hearing both sides, we find that the Commissioner has latched on the duty liability on the CHA in respect of four consignments involved in this app....