2009 (2) TMI 673

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....before us against the penalty imposed on him by the Adjudicating Authority. The reason for imposition of penalty on the appellant is that the appellant being a Chartered Engineer had given certificates as regards the value of the goods which were exported by M/s. Rama Enterprises, Tanisq Bros, Goyal Impex and Industries, Goyal Exports and Diamond Mink Blankets. It is the allegation in the show cause notice that the appellant herein had never seen any of the goods for which he had given valuation certificate. It is the Revenue's case that based upon such valuation certificate given by the appellant, the shipping bills and other documents passed by the lower authorities and the exporters herein mentioned above have got ineligible DEPB benefit....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ies cleared the export consignment. On such clearance of the goods for export, the exporters got ineligible DEPB benefits. He would submit that the appellant had abetted the crime, by giving false certificate without having facility for testing the goods and without checking the authenticity of the exporters. He would rely upon the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in the case of C.D. Govinda Rao v. Government of India as reported at 1987 (27) E.L.T. 209 (Ker.), for the proposition that confiscation is not pre-requisite for imposition of penalty. 6. We have considered the submission made at length by both sides and perused the records. The issue involved in this case is regarding the imposition of penalty on the appellant....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only) (d)     Rajesh Kumar Jain Rs. 5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only) (e)      Shri Manga Reddy Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakhs only) (f)      under Section 114(i) of the Customs Act, 1962. 7. Surprisingly though the said show cause notice dated 30-7-2003 was also issued to the current appellant but he was not called in those proceedings and nor was he made a party for imposition of penalties by the Adjudicating Authority in that order. 8. Subsequently, the Adjudicating Authority took up the cases of the current appellant for adjudication and came to a conclusion and imposed penalty of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty t....