2018 (5) TMI 168

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... short) in Customs Appeal No. C/51369/2014. 2. The impugned order substantially sets aside observations and findings made in the order-in-original dated 31st October, 2013 by deleting penalty of Rs. 67,17,015/- under Section 112 of the Act and reduces the penalty imposed under Section 114AA of the Act from Rs. 67,17,015/- to Rs. 5,00,000/-. The appellate order also sets aside the direction that the appellant was liable to pay customs duty of Rs. 67,17,015/-. 3. While reducing the penalty under Section 114AA of the Act, the Tribunal had held as under:- "9. However, the available evidence including the statement of the transporter and presence of gate pass with the appellant, his prior knowledge of contents, alongwith other evidences....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....appellant. 6. Bill of Entry No. 168385 dated 16th November, 2010 in the name of M/s Rajdhani Crafts, Jaipur was assessed and the goods herald frame (spare parts of weaving machine) valued at Rs. 5,66,862/- attracting nil customs duty were assessed and cleared. 7. After clearance, while the goods were lying outside the clearance gate, the appellant had appeared and had shown his F card to take delivery of the consignment. As there was information regarding mis-declaration and clandestine import, the consignment was kept under surveillance and intercepted. The appellant, on being questioned, had revealed and stated that Mr.Biplav Kumar, who was working for M/s Rajender P. Kapoor had completed clearance formalities and thereafter had lef....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ppellant had been falsely implicated in the present case even though he was neither concerned nor connected with the subject goods. The appellant got involved with the subject goods only by extending helping hand to one of his known person Shri Biplav Kumar who is employee of another CHA M/s Rajinder P. Kapur who had, after clearing the subject from upon fulfilling customs formalities, handed over the copy of gate pass to the appellant with a request to give it for transpiration. Shri Biplav Kumar had informed him about the contents of the goods. It was in this context that the appellant was having the gate pass and was having prior knowledge about the contents of the consignment. The fact that the appellant himself voluntary approached the....