Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S. Panjrath Road Carriers vs Commissioner Of Customs, Ludhiana on 4 September, 2017
CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SCO 147-148, SECTOR 17-C, CHANDIGARH 160 017 COURT NO. I Appeal No. C/60492-60496,60498,60500/2016-SM Date of Hearing/ Decision : 04.09.2017 [Arising out of Order-in-Original No. OIO-13/YDB/COMMR/LDH/CUSTM/2016 dated 26.07.2016 passed by the Commissioner Central Excise & Customs, Ludhiana] M/s. Panjrath Road Carriers : Appellant M/s. Gill Randhawa Roadlines M/s. Akal Transport Company M/s. D D Khosla Transport Pvt Limited Shri Gagan Khanna M/s. Arisudana Industries Limited M/s. Karam Freight Movers vs. Commissioner of Customs, Ludhiana : Respondent
Appearance:
Ms. Kanika Malhotra, Advocate for the Appellant(s) Shri Tarun Kumar, A.R. for the Respondent(s) CORAM:
Honble Mrs. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) Final Order No. 61727-61733 / 2017 Per : Archana Wadhwa All the appeals are being disposed of by a common order as they arise out of the same impugned order passed by the Commissioner.
2. As per facts on record, most of the appellants are transporters upon whom penalty of varying amounts stand imposed under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act. However, M/s. Karan Freight Movers are CHA and Shri Gagan Khanna, Director of M/s. Arisudana Industries Limited had purchased the imported material.
It is seen that one M/s. Canon Industries Pvt. Limited purchased the consignment of Acrylic Tow, Polyester Staple Fibre, Bamboo Fibre, Synthetic waste and Polyester yarn etc. on high-sea sale basis from M/s. Garg Acrylic, M/s. Garg International and M/s. SMN Industries. The documents for clearance of the said consignment were filed by the CHA M/s. Karam Freight Movers. The said documents were filed under Target Plus scheme and were cleared free of duty under the said scheme. The goods were transported by the transporters in question to the premises of the original importers who had sold the goods, on high-sea sale to M/s. Canon Industries Pvt. Limited. The original importer further sold the goods to one M/s. Gagan Khanna, Director of Arisudana Industries Limited.
3. In terms of the Target Plus scheme, the goods imported are required to be used by the same importer on actual user condition. The investigation conducted by the DRI revealed that, after clearance of the goods under the said scheme, M/s. Canon Industries Pvt. Limited further handed over the same to the original importer from whom he had purchased the goods. This led to the fact that M/s. Canon Industries Pvt. Limited were utilised only for the fact of clearance of the goods under Target Plus scheme as he was having the said license.
4. After investigation, proceedings were initiated against all the persons including the present appellants. It may be mentioned here that as per the records, neither M/s. Garg Acrylic, M/s. Garg International have filed appeal nor M/s. Canon Industries Pvt. Limited have challenged the said order.
5. The present appeals stand filed by the transporters challenging the imposition of penalties upon them. However, it is seen that the said imposition is only a mechanical imposition inasmuch as, there is no evidence on record to show that the transporters were aware of the fraud if any, committed by importers. They have been engaged to transport the imported goods from the customs area to the premises of original importers who sold their goods. The transporters cannot be expected to know as to what fraud is going to be committed subsequently by the said recipient of the goods. As such, the imposition of penalties upon them, on the ground that they had transported the tainted goods, cannot be justified. Accordingly, I set-aside the penalties imposed on all the transporters.
Imposition of penalty upon the CHA M/s. Karan Freight Movers is also not justified in the absence of any evidence to show that they aided and abetted the fraud. In fact, the filing of bills of entries by M/s. Canon Industries Pvt. Limited under Target Plus scheme by the present CHA is in accordance with law and the fraud stands committed only after the clearance of the goods. As such it cannot be said that the CHA was involved in the fraudulent import of goods. Accordingly, I set-aside the penalty imposed on the CHA also.
Similarly, sale of the goods to M/s. Arisudana Industries Limited by M/s. Garg International, M/s. Garg Acrylic and M/s. SMN Industries cannot reflect any malafide on the purchaser, in the absence of any evidence to show that he was aware of the clearances of the goods under Target Plus scheme. Any purchaser in the ordinary course of business, cannot be held liable to penal action on the ground that the goods involved were tainted and cleared by the original importer with a malafide intention. As such, imposition of penalty upon him is also set-aside.
6. In view of the above, all the appeals are allowed by setting-aside the penalty imposed upon them.
(Order dictated and pronounced in the court) Archana Wadhwa Member (Judicial) KL 4 Appeal No. C/60492-60500/2016