2025 (7) TMI 1275

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....stern Zonal Bench, Kolkata (Tribunal) in Customs Appeal no. 75060 of 2017. 2. The appellant has raised the following substantial questions of law for consideration : i) Whether the learned Tribunal all along proceeded in the matter putting the petitioner in the same footing with the other appellant which is wrongful and incorrect inasmuch as the case of the petitioner and the case of the other appellant are not the same and cannot be treated on the same footing ? ii) Whether the learned Tribunal at the time of passing the impugned order misdirected itself in holding that the petitioner, the appellant therein, could not make out a convincing case for non-imposing penalty upon the petitioner ? iii) Whether during the proceeding initi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Unit, intercepted a consignment of export of an attempted smuggling of Red Sander wood logs in the guise of Nepalese can handicrafts by CTD dated 30.3.2014. Upon examination of the consignment, the goods were seized which consisted of 210 Red Sander wood logs against 56 packages of Nepalese cane handicraft as declared. Dilip Kumar Sarkar of the appellant informed the Investigating Officers that he was unaware of the stuffing of the container but had heard from the lorry driver that the stuffing was done somewhere in Darbhanga. The details of the transporter were also mentioned. Upon further investigation the F. Card holder and owner of the appellant Sudipta Bose, informed the authorities that they had taken up the dock clearance for export....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hich has been dismissed by the learned Tribunal. On facts there is no dispute that the appellant completely failed in ascertaining the whereabouts by way of KYC of the persons associated from whom they had sourced the business nor were they in possession of any letter of authorization or profile assessment and verification report of their ultimate client. The company at Nepal for whom they undertook the said transit clearance of Nepal based cargo meant for export to Korea. The appellant contended that the show-cause notice does not make out any adjudication of abetment against the appellant and therefore no penalty can be imposed under section 114(i) of the Act. This argument was rejected by the learned Tribunal after noting the facts and o....