TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (9) TMI 352
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....: Shri K. Sivakumar, A.R. JUDGEMENT Per: M.V. Ravindran: By this common order, we are proposing to dispose the following stay petitions which are filed for waiver of pre-deposit of the amounts of penalties against each applicant. SN Name of the appellant Penalty under Section 112(b) of Customs Act, 1962 Penalty under Section 114(i) of Customs Act, 1962 1 M/s Kailashpati Chemicals & Mineral Ind Rs.25 lakhs Rs.25 lakhs 2 Shri Sumerpuri Goswami Rs.25 lakhs Rs.25 lakhs 3 M/s Indian Potash Ltd. Duty of Rs.62,39,145/- with interest and equal amount of penalty - 4 Shri Pravin Saraf Rs.50 lakhs ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....purchase of fertilizers from the appellant herein would do so after proper authorization. It is his submission that duty cast on M/s Indian Potash Ltd is over once he sells the goods to dealer who are authorized. It is his submission that the confirmation of demand along with interest and imposition of penalty on the appellant is incorrect. 4. Shri R. Subramanya, ld. Advocate appearing on behalf of M/s Kumar & Brothers would submit that the appellant herein in this case are the registered dealers of fertilizers. It is his submission that they are registered with the State Government and are required to procure the same from registered importer of fertilizers and in this case they are M/s Indian Potash Ltd. He would bring to our notice th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....It is his submission that none of the persons of appellant M/s M/s Kailashpati Chemicals & Mineral Industries were aware what is being loaded into containers and what is going for export. It is his submission that in any case, penalty under Section 112(b) will not survive and penalty under Section 114(i) should also be waived as the appellant herein is a small person and does not have any mean of remuneration. It is his submission that the same argument will hold good for Shri Sumerpuri Goswami also. 7. Ld. Counsel Shri H.D. Dave appearing on behalf of Shri Vijay Singh Gohil would submit that the said appellant is a partner of M/s Jay Bhavani Roadlines. It is his submission that the appellant herein was only engaged for vehicles to be gi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and Bill of Lading is not disputed by said M/s Kailashpati Chemicals & Mineral Industries or by the assessee. It is his submission that the finding of the adjudicating authority that one of their employees had lent his name for a consideration of Rs.200 per container for the export is an issue for which they have already removed the employee and said act was done by the employee on his personal capacity. 10. Ld. D.R. submits that all the appellants herein have played some role or other in trying to defraud the Revenue by exporting MOP which is a fertilizer in the guise of industrial salt. It is his submission that the role played by each of them needs to be appreciated from the evidences on record, which indicate that the every individua....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d grant another personal hearing. In our view, all the records produced by ld. Counsel before us cannot be gone into by us at this stage as they have to be appreciated by adjudicating authority. In view of this, we allow the applications for waiver of pre-deposit of the amounts of penalties imposed on Shri Shantilal Mali and take up the appeal itself for disposal and set aside the impugned order to the extent it has imposed penalties on Shri Shantilal Mali (in Appeal No.C/148/2012) with a direction to adjudicating authority to reconsider his case after following the principles of natural justice. Ld.Counsel undertakes to co-operate with the adjudicating authority as and when personal hearing is granted to them. 13. In sum, the appeal of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Forwarders, we find from record that M/s Classic Freight Forwarders has taken all the proper precautions regarding filing of authorization. They would not know what is stuffed in the containers as the documents indicated consignment as consisting of industrial salt for export. Accordingly, the applicant M/s Classic Freight Forwarders has made out a case for the waiver of pre-deposit of the amount of penalty imposed under Section 114(i) of Customs Act, 1962 by the adjudicating authority. iii) As regards the penalties imposed under Section 114(i) of Customs Act, 1962 on others, we find that the roles played by each appellant needs to be appreciated from the evidences on record. It is seen from the Order-in-Original that the adjudicating a....