TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (7) TMI 792
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oods were valued at Rs. 7,70,459/-. Since none of them could produce licit documents relating to lawful acquisition and importation of the impugned goods recovered the said goods were seized under Section 110 of the Customs Act, 1962. Separate summons were issued to each of the seven passengers but only Shri Jaswinder Singh appeared giving credence to the fact that all the goods belonged to him alone. It was also felt that these goods were brought for commercial benefit. 2.1. Accordingly, the Additional Commissioner of Customs, Kolkata Airport passed the order vide Order-in-Original No. 23/2012 dated 29.12.2012 and ordered: (i) confiscation of the impugned goods under Section Ill(d), (j) and (l) of the Customs Act, 1962 with an option to redeem the same against payment of redemption fine of Rs. 50,000/-. (ii) imposed personal penalty of Rs. 15,000/- on applicant under Section 112 (a) & (b) of Customs Act, 1962. 3. Aggrieved by the said order, the applicant filed appeal along with stay application before the Commissioner (Appeals). The stay petition was decided by Order-in-Stay No. 27/Cus (Bag)/Kol(AP)/2013 dated 19.08.2013 and stay was granted subject to deposit o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....compliance of the pre-deposit of the penalty was however legally and morally bound to examine the legality, propriety and correctness of the said order made by the adjudicating authority and having failed to do so called for setting aside of the said order. 4.6. The applicant prayed that the Revision Application be taken up for hearing on the merits by waving the condition of making the pre-deposit of the penalty of Rs. 15,000/-. 5. A show cause notice was also issued to the Respondent Commissionerate on 12.01.2016, in response to which the following submissions have been made: 5.1. That the contention of the applicant is not correct in as much as the settled position of law is that appeal as a whole is liable to be dismissed for failure of the applicant to deposit the amount of penalty. That there is no specific provision in Section 129E that in the case where the applicant fails to pre-deposit the amount of penalty, the appeal should be dismissed. 5.2. That the appeal filed before Commissioner (Appeals) was against Order-in Original issued after adjudication under quasi judicial proceedings. That the criminal proceeding launched before a Court of law has little or no ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....4. That from the evidence and documents submitted it is clear that the none of the items imported by the applicant in the mode of baggage were banned or prohibited in nature nor notified in terms of Chapter - IV A of the Customs Act, 1962 or did attract the provisions of Section 123 of the stature, so as to invoke Section 104 of Customs Act, 1962 for his arrest and ultimately for the sanction of the prosecution under Section 135 (1) a & b (i) of the Customs Act, 1962. 7. Government has carefully gone through the relevant case records available in case files, oral & written submission and perused the impugned Order-in-Original and Order-in-Appeal. 8. On perusal of records, Government observes that on 10.05.2007, the applicant travelled from Bangkok to Kolkata and with assorted garments, mobile phones with accessories, micro SD adapters with memory card, mobile phone batteries etc. along with Indian currency Rs. 25,000/-. Seven other passengers were also intercepted in the green channel and similar items were recovered from their possession. These passenger claimed to be carrying these goods on behalf of Shri Jaswinder Singh. Since none of them could produce licit documents re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....venue." A plain reading of the provisions of Section 129 E of the Customs Act, 1962 as above makes the position crystal clear that for filing appeal before the appellate authority, the appellant shall pending the appeal, deposit the duty demanded or penalty imposed unless specifically dispensed with by the Appellate Authority. 10. Upon perusal of the records, Government observes that appeal was filed before Commissioner (Appeals) and the Stay Petition was decided by Order-in-Stay no. 27/Cus(Bag)/Kol(AP)/2013 dated 19.08.2013 and stay was granted, subject to deposit of an amount of Rs. 15,000/- towards the penalty amount on or before 19.09.2013 under Section 129 E of Customs Act, 1962. The applicant was informed that subject to compliance with the above direction, the appeal will be heard on merits and was further informed that in case they fail to comply with the aforesaid conditions of stay on or before the due date, their appeal is liable to be disallowed in terms of Section 128A of the Customs Act, 1962 without any further reference. As the applicant admittedly failed to comply with these directions which were in the nature of precondition for hearing the case on merits, G....