TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2001 (5) TMI 674
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r penalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act is imposable on all three appellants. 2. Shri Goutam Chakraborty, learned Senior Advocate, submitted that M.V. "Green Opal" while on way to Singapore from Calcutta on 19-6-1977 collided with a barge and sank causing obstruction to the navigational channel; that a Greek Salvage Company was appointed by the Calcutta Port Trust Authorities for salvaging and removing the wreckage of the sunken vessel; that the Government of India granted exemption to Greek Salvage Co. from payment of Custom duty on temporary import of equipments for the purpose of undertaking the salvage exercise, under Section 25(2) of the Customs Act; that the said Company failed to perform the salvage work; that a Dutch Sa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... on the mechanical grab crane used for the purpose of salvage work and imposed penalty of Rs. 10 lakh on SMIT, and Rs. 1 lakh each on Patvolk and Shri S.R. Ghosh Dastidar, Chief Resident Executive; that another amount of Rs. 94,705/- was demanded under letter dated 24-12-1999 on the ground of fluctuations of exchange rate. 3. The learned Senior Counsel, further, submitted that the Commissioner has dropped the demand on all the goods except consumable goods and mechanical grab in terms of Notification Nos. 20/99-Cus. and 22/99-Cus. both dated 28-2-1999; that the Commissioner has overlooked the statutory provisions of the Customs Act; that Section 86(1) of the Act provides that any stores imported in a vessel can remain on board the ve....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f arguments nor the records of personal hearing would in any manner support the erroneous finding. He also contended that the goods were not liable to confiscation under Section 111(d), (e) and (m) of the Customs Act; the goods being neither dutiable nor prohibited goods; that as Commissioner allowed the appellants to file Bills of Entry by condoning the delay, it cannot be held that they had infringed the procedure of filing of declaration under Section 46 of the Act; that no penalty is imposable upon the appellants as the primary condition for invoking the provisions of Section 112 have not been satisfied; that Commissioner himself had recorded in the impugned order that there was "no suspect intent" on the part of the appellants; that fu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....self taken a lenient view by not imposing any redemption fine and imposed only nominal penalty. 5. We have considered the submissions of both the sides. We observe from the reply dated 14-9-1999 to the show cause notice filed by M/s. SMIT that in para 18 they had clearly mentioned that all the consumables were not for home or domestic consumption but exclusively used for the salvage operation, that mechanical grab was part and parcel of the salvage barge and cannot be treated as a different equipment. We also note that in para 5.2 of the written submission filed by them, the appellants had drawn the attention of the Adjudicating Authority to the provisions of Section 86(1) of the Customs Act and contended that no Customs duty was paya....