2022 (10) TMI 964

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ner for the Revenue. 3. Brief facts, which are relevant for my consideration, as could be gathered from hearing both sides and from perusal of the Demand-cum-Show Cause Notice dated 21.08.2020, inter alia, are that M/s. Universal Exim, Old No. 204/New No. 231, Ground Floor, Thambu Chetty Street, Mannady, Chennai - 600 001 (IEC No. 0415019303) had imported goods declared as "Stationery Goods" vide Bill-of-Lading dated 02.01.2018; that the said consignment was imported in container bearing number TCNU8248262 at M/s. A.S. Shipping Agencies Private Limited, Container Freight Station, No. 9, Vellalar Street, Vellapanchavadi Numbal Village, Chennai - 600 077; that as on the date of the Demand-cum-Show Cause Notice, the importer had not filed B....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed statements under Section 108 ibid. and thereafter, penalties were proposed on various persons including penalties under Section 112(b) and Section 114AA ibid. on the appellant before this forum. The appellant appears to have filed a detailed reply, consequent to which Order-in-Original No. 76671/2020 dated 28.10.2020 came to be passed, whereby the appellant has been fastened only with the proposed penalty under Section 112(b) ibid. of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs only). It is interesting to note the observations of the Adjudicating Authority at paragraph 69 of the Order-in-Original, after considering the statements as well as records, which reads as under:- "... 69. In view of the above, I find that though the invol....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cted above (paragraph 69 of the Order-in-Original), clearly exonerates this appellant from the penal action under Section 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962, for the reason that there was no material on record to prove that the appellant had submitted the fake gate pass. The above, clubbed with the earlier portion of the order of the Adjudicating Authority that there was no evidence other than the statement of one Shri R. Suresh to suggest the involvement of this appellant in the illegal removal of the subject container, clearly indicates that the appellant has been targeted for no reason whatsoever in this case. 7.2 Further, there is no material brought on record as to the role of this appellant, i.e., act or omission, that has led to the c....