2018 (1) TMI 221

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... routed through Citi Bank and upon receipt of the goods at the Indian Port the appellant filed the Bills of Entry with the Customs Authorities for clearance of the goods and the bankers' copy with the City Bank to remit the foreign exchange in respect of the imports. Upon remittance being made Citi Bank released the documents of title to the goods which were then filed with the Customs Authorities for release of the goods from Indian customs. According to the appellant Citi Bank was thus responsible for filing the exchange control copies with the Reserve Bank of India. 2. The appellant contends that after more than 5-6 years of all the equipments and spares being imported by the appellant, respondent issued a memorandum dated 8th June, 200....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t to the remittances made against the 12 Bills of Entries issued against the supporting documents. It also filed a list of Bills of Entries that had been submitted to the Citi Bank for a value of Rs.15,10,303.21. However the Special Director of the respondent passed the adjudication order dated 26th September, 2003 holding that the appellant has failed to file the Bills of Entry in respect of an amount of US$ 6,82,489.95 and imposed a penalty of Rs.2,04,00,000/- upon the appellant and a further penalty of Rs.50 lakhs on each of its Directors being respondents No.2 to 5 in the present appeal. 4. Aggrieved by the adjudication order dated 25th September, 2003 the appellant filed an appeal before the Appellate Tribunal of Foreign Exchange unde....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e Court reported as (2010) 4 SCC 772 Raj Kumar Shivhare Vs. Assistant Director, Directorate of Enforcement and Anr. 8. The primary ground on which the appellant seeks modification of the order impugned is financial hardship to the appellant and otherwise financial credibility of the appellant based on its assets. In M/s. Hindustan Steel Ltd. Vs. The State of Orissa (1969) 2 SCC 627 dealing with the question of imposition of penalty Supreme Court noted: "Penalty will not also be imposed merely because it is lawful to do so. Whether penalty should be imposed for failure to perform a statutory obligation is a matter of discretion of the authority to be exercised judicially and on a consideration of all the relevant circumstances. Even if a m....