2017 (6) TMI 256

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 3. The Adjudicating Authority observed that both the appellants had abetted/colluded with the exporter, M/s Santosh Overseas Trade Corporation, in contravening the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962 and also failed to discharge their duties properly as laid down under Sections 117 and 51 of the Act, 1962, for the purpose of scrutiny of Bill of Export and examination of the goods and the appellants are liable to penalty under Section 117 of the Act, 1962. 4. Section 117 of the Act provides that any person who contravenes any provision of this Act or abets any such contravention, shall be liable to penalty. The ld.Counsel for the appellants, drew the attention of the Bench of the relevant portion of the Central Excise Manual 2013-2014 ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ocate appearing for the appellants argued that a notice is required to be given to the officers within time specified under Sec 155 (2) of the Customs Act 1962 and that no such notice was issued to the appellants. It is observed from Para-23 of the OIO dt 20/8/2007 passed by the Adjudicating authority that this point was specifically taken by the appellant before the adjudicating authority but Adjudicating authority has not given any findings on this issue. It is observed that CESTAT Bangalore in the case of CC & CE Hyderabad-II Vs Rajiv Kumar Agarwal (Supra) has taken following view on the applicability of Sec 155 (2) of the Customs Act 1962 :- 6.1No doubt, the above allegations are quite serious in nature. However, the Adjudicati....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....entral Government or any officer of the Government or a local authority for anything purporting to be done in pursuance of this Act without giving the Central Government or such officer a months previous notice in writing of the intended proceeding and of the cause thereof, or after the expiration of three months from the accrual of such cause. A reading of the said Act shows that the protection under the above section is applicable to all legal proceedings. Further, if protection to officers against proceedings in courts can be given, there is no reason why such a protection cannot be given to proceedings before quasi judicial authorities. Therefore, we do not find much substance in the Revenues contention. Further, the Tribunal, ....