TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2000 (9) TMI 366
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oms Act, besides confirming the demand of Customs Duty amounting to Rs. 5,23,800/-. 2. The Appellants have also filed an application for production of Additional documents, in the form of photographs of MTS system, technical literature of the system and the items imported by them, purchase order, Bill of Lading, and copy of letter dated 20-12-1999 from their overseas supplier. 3. Shri R. Sudhinder, Ld. Advocate, submitted that these documents are necessary for the decision in the appeal filed by them and they may be allowed to be taken on record in the interest of justice. Shri Ashok Kumar, Ld. DR, has no objection in taking these documents on record. Accordingly we allow the Misc. Application and the additional documents are ta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n his statements, Shri Rakesh Darbani, Chief Manager, Process Engineering ASP recorded on 8-12-1999, has nowhere mentioned that wrong declaration was made by them deliberately; that there was no intention on the part of the Appellants to evade payment of Customs duty; had that there been any intention to evade payment of duty, the packing list would not have given the detailed description of all the goods imported by them; that this was a case where the supplier has erred in giving the proper description of the products; that the detailed description of the items that were imported was given in the purchase order indicating the real character and function of the product, that accordingly penalty under Section 114A of the Customs Act is not ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lants imported Hardware Interface and Software and they had made a misdeclaration on the Bill of Entry with a view to avail Nil rate of duty and as such the penalty under Section 114A of the Customs Act is imposable; that in addition as the Customs House agent was working as their agent and the wrongful acts done by agent will make them vicariously liable for penalty. He also submitted that the redemption fine of Rs. 5 lakhs is not on the higher side as the impugned goods were valued at Rs. 13.53 lakhs. 7. We have considered the submissions of both the sides. As the Appellants have waived the requirement of show cause notice and the impugned Order has been passed after hearing their representatives and Customs House Agent, the Appella....