2025 (1) TMI 1268

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....962 has been confirmed. Relevant Para Nos.34 and 63 read as under:- "34.00. Notice No. 6, Shri S. Emmanuel Philip, Sr. Manager, M/s. Awardlink Logistics India Pvt. Ltd., and Noticee No. 7, M/s. Awardlink Logistics India Pvt. Ltd. vide written submission dated 21.06.2021 and Ms. K. Nancy in personal hearing dated 28.10.2021 had submitted that their clients are engaged in logistics business. They provide assistance in clearance of LCL and FCL cargo. arrange for container booking. She has stated that as seen from the show cause notice it is clear that one Mr. Manikandan and Mr. Antony Swamy are the main persons involved in alleged export of red sand/armature shafters. The noticee has played only limited role in booking the containers from on....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Moves Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs (Exports), Chennai 2007 (219) E.L.T. 67. 63.00. I have carefully gone through the submissions detailed in Para 33.00 above and the statement in Para 47.00 above. I find that the case laws submitted by the notice are not relevant to this case as facts and circumstances of this case are different that those of the said case laws. From the above, I find that Shri Emmanuel Philip, Sr. Manager of M/s. Awardlink Logistics India Pvt. Ltd., Chennai had arranged container to the third party Shri Sathish Kumar in a casual manner through M/s. RCL Agencies East India Pvt. Ltd., who neither verified the Exporter/IEC holder nor ascertained the authenticity of Shri Sathish Kumar in the subject case, if verifi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... is that the petitioner has no direct role to play in the alleged export of red sand/armature shaft and that the petitioner has been made a scape goat. 4. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Sr. Panel Counsel for the respondent. I have also perused the impugned order which has confirmed the penalty of Rs. 2/- Crores under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962 on the petitioner. 5. Even if the role of the petitioner in the alleged illegal export of red sand/armature shaft is confirmed, the imposition of penalty of Rs. 2/- Crores, on a Senior Manager cannot be countenanced as it appears to be disproportionate with the gains that the petitioner would have made from the alleged inv....