Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S Raja Singh vs C.C. New Delhi on 29 June, 2016
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI
PRINCIPAL BENCH, COURT NO. IV
Customs Appeal No. C/50921/2015-Ex[SM]
[Arising out of Order-In-Appeal No. CCA-CUS/ICD/772/2014 dated 24.12.2014 passed by Commr.(Appeals) New Delhi]
For approval and signature:
Hon'ble Mr. S.K. M ohanty, Member (Judicial)
1
Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
2
Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?
3
Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order?
4
Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities?
M/s Raja Singh ...Appellant(s)
Vs.
C.C. New Delhi Respondent(s)
Appearance:
Mr. Bhasin Sethi (Advocate) for the Appellant Mr. K. Poddar (DR) for the Respondent CORAM:
Hon'ble Mr. S.K. Mohanty, Member (Judicial) Date of Hearing/ Decision. 29.06.2016 Final Order No. 55444 /2016_ Per S. K. Mohanty:
This appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 24.12.2014 passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) New Delhi.
2. Brief facts of the case are that M/s Star Enterprises through its CHA has filed the bills of entry for clearance of imported goods, declaring the same as Bitumen. On the basis of Intelligence report, the consignment covered under the Bill of Entry was opened and found to contain black oil type item. The department drew representative sample from the imported consignment and sent to CRCL for testing purpose. The CRCL vide report dated 07.10.2011 clarified that sample fall under category of waste and also covered under the category of hazardous waste. Finally, the CRCL has certified that the goods imported are other than bitumen. On the basis of the report furnished by CRCL, the Department initiated show cause proceedings against the importer for confiscation of goods and for imposition of penalty. Proceedings were also initiated against the CHA and the appellant herein. In adjudication, penalty of Rs. 10 Lakh was imposed on the appellant under Section 112(a) (i) read with Section 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962. In appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) vide the impugned order has upheld imposition of penalty in the adjudication order. Hence this present appeal is before this Tribunal.
2. Sh. Bhasin Sethi, the Ld. Advocate appearing for the appellant submits that the appellant was concerned with importation of goods, and thus, he was not aware about the consignment covered under the Bill of Entry. It is his further submission that since the appellant was not connected with the importation of the goods and he has only stated the wrong fact that he is the Manager of the importer, there is no involvement of any mens rea, calling for imposition of penalty.
3. On the other hand, Sh. K Poddar, the Ld. DR for Revenue reiterates the findings recorded in the impugned order and further submits that since the appellant has mis-represented himself as the Manager of the importer and subsequently withdrew such stand that he is the mere Liaison Agent, his role is established so far as importation of the hazardous waste is concerned.
4. I have heard the Ld. Counsel for both the sides and perused the records.
5. I find that excepting the fact regarding mis-representation that the appellant is the Manager of the importer, nothing material is available on record to show that he is directly involved in mis-declaring the goods by filing the Bill of Entry. Yet, since he has given such incorrect statement, I am of the view that he is exposed to the penal liability provided under Section 112(a) (i) read with Section 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962. However, considering the nature of the case and the gravity of the offence, I am of the view that penalty can be reduced to Rs.1,00,000/-. Therefore, the impugned order is modified to the extent of reducing the penalty to Rs.1,00,000/-. The appeal is disposed of.
(Dictated and pronounced in open court) (S. K. Mohanty) Member(Judicial) Neha 2 | Page C/50921/2015-[SM]