2018 (7) TMI 549

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Shri R. N. Bandhyopadhyay, Consultant & Ms. Debi Parbat, Advocate for the Appellant Shri S. Guha, A.C. (AR) for the Respondent   ORDER Per Shri C. L. Mahar   The present appeals have been filed by the Appellant against the impugned Order-in-Original No. 28/Cus/CC(P)/WB/2008 dated 15.12.2008 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Prev.), W.B., Kolkata. 2. Brief facts of t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Section 111 (l) and 111 (m) of the Customs Act, 1962 was issued in the Show Cause Notice, penalty on different persons including the appellants under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962 was also proposed for imposition. The Show Cause Notice came to be adjudicated by Ld. Commissioner vide his order dated 15.12.2018 wherein apart from confiscation of the consignment involved under the above-menti....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... argued that from the investigations as well as the various statements recorded, there is nothing which can make the appellant liable for penalty under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962. It has been vehemently argued that Section 112 is invocable only in the circumstances, whereas a person is involved in abetting of smuggling or mis-declaration or evasion of Customs duty or in cases where he de....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ption of the impugned imported cargo. It has been stressed that they had accepted the cost of clearance of the subject import consignment in normal course and were not at all aware that the importer has misdeclared the quantities of the imported garments. 5. We have heard both sides and also perused the records of the appeal. 6. It is a matter of record that in all the statements which have ....