TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (5) TMI 173
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y under the provisions of Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 on the ground that they had connived and colluded with one Shri Sujit Satam for smuggling of restricted items i.e. foreign branded cigarettes and liquor. 3. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of both the appellants would take us through the case records and submit that the activity of the appellants at the most falls under the category of lending of their IEC Code to Shri Sujit Satam. She would submit that the adjudicating authority has clearly recorded that Shri Sujit Satam was the main brain behind the imports of cigarettes and liquor under the guise of computer casing and had financed the entire payment of duty. She would submit that mere lending of IEC Code is not an of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Kishore Shah also had helped Shri Sujit Satam for arranging banker's cheque or demand draft for the payment of duty on the mis-declared goods i.e. computer casing, in the name of one of the employees. These facts indicate that Shri Kishore Shah was aware of nefarious activity of Shri Sujit Satam as otherwise he would have issued demand draft of the firm M/s Darshana Impex. Since the consignment which is confiscated by the adjudicating authority is of M/s Darshana Impex and Shri Kishore Shah handling day-to-day activity of said firm he is liable for penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. In our considered view the findings recorded by the adjudicating authority clearly brings out the knowledge on the part of Shri Kishore Sha....