2017 (11) TMI 44

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Commissioner (AR) ORDER Per : S.S GARG The present appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 30.06.2016 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals) whereby the Commissioner (Appeals) has upheld the Order-in-Original imposing penalty of Rs, 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) on the appellant under Section 117 of the Customs Act 1962. Briefly the facts of the present case a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the short payment, show-cause notice dated 06.11.2015 was issued to the appellant and also the importer. The show-cause notice alleged that importer as well  as the appellant were aware of the increase in the duty but failed to inform the same to the department. Therefore, it was sought to impose penalty under Section 112(a) & 117 of the Customs Act, 1962 for violation of Regulation 13(d) of ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 39/2015 Cus. had not been uploaded in the  system on account of which enhancement in tariff value was not reflected in the system. She further submitted that the mistake is on the part of the department which is now being covered up in the impugned order and for the mistake of the department appellant should not be penalized. She further submitted that the appellant advised the importer to p....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....f the appellant as the changes were not updated in the system and the appellants have only filed a Bill of Entry on behalf of their client and they have taken proper care to file the Bill of Entry and therefore I do not find any lapse on their part so as to impose penalty for the fault of the system which has not been updated as on the date of filing of the Bill of Entry. Further I also find that ....