2025 (11) TMI 698

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....how cause notice dated 25.02.2014 issued by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence to five persons including the appellant herein and his father Shri Lilaram Arjandas Asudani. In the impugned order, the Commissioner imposed a penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs on the appellant assailing which this appeal has been filed. 2. We have heard Shri Salil Arora, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri Shiv Shankar, learned authorized representative for the Revenue and perused the records. Submissions on behalf of the appellant :- 3. Shri Salil Arora, learned counsel for the appellant made the following submissions :- (i) The appellant is the son of Shri Lilaram Arjandas Asudani, who was the mastermind in importing goods through under-valu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o others. There is no direct evidence that the appellant was involved in smuggling or under-valuation. (vii) The adjudicating authority held that the appellant was aware of under-valuation of the goods and had suppressed facts which amounted to smuggling. The appellant had nothing to do with the import of memory cards by M/s DK Enterprises nor can there be any act or omission on his part. (viii) There is no evidence of that the appellant had any knowledge about the consignments or the undervaluation of the goods and, therefore, no penalty should have been imposed on the appellant. The impugned order may be set aside insofar as it imposes penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs on the appellant. Submissions on behalf of the Revenue :- ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....for coordinating the shipment details and manipulation of documents. Incriminating E-mails, call records and WhatsApp messages were found with the appellant which establishes his knowledge and complicity in the scheme of under-valuation. (c) Shri Dhiraj Kumar Thakur, Proprietor of M/s D.K. Enterprises in whose name the consignments were sent; and (d) Shri Sarav Pramodchandra Suthar, employee of the importing firms. (v) As far as the appellant is concerned, he had knowingly involved and participated directly in manipulation of invoices and communication of false information resulting in under-valuation of the goods. The goods were thus rendered liable to confiscation under section 111 (m) (vi) For these ac....