Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
C.C. New Delhi vs M/S Buhariwala Logistgics on 13 April, 2016
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX
APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, NEW DELHI
PRINCIPAL BENCH, COURT NO. III
Customs Appeal No. C/54467/2015-[SM]
[Arising out of Order-In-Appeal No. CC(A)/CUS/Import/1198/2015 dated 22.09.2015 passed by CC New Delhi]
For approval and signature:
Hon'ble Mr. S.K. Mohanty, 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?
C.C. New Delhi ...Appellant(s)
(Import & General)
Vs.
M/s Buhariwala Logistgics Respondent(s)
Appearance:
Mr. G. R. Singh (DR) for the Appellant Mr. Sanjay Kantawala (Advocate) for the Respondent CORAM:
Hon'ble Mr. S.K. Mohanty, Member (Judicial) Date of Hearing/ Decision. 13.04.2016 Final Order No. 54558 /2016_ Per S. K. Mohanty:
Revenue filed this appeal against the impugned order dated 22.09.2015 passed by the Commissioner 0f Customs (Appeals), New Delhi, where penalty of Rs. 5,00,000/- imposed under Section 112(a) & (b) of the Customs Act, 1962 on the respondent was set aside.
2. Heard both sides and perused the records.
3. I find that the respondent is a Customs House Agent (CHA). The penalty was imposed on the respondent on the basis of statement of Sh. G.S. Prince, the G. Card Holder of Ms. Buhariwala Logistics, CHA. The Commissioner (Appeals) observed that in this case, it is not in the knowledge of the respondent that Sh. G.S. Prince was involved in the illegal import and he (G. S. Prince) acted in the personal capacity for monetary gain. It is also observed that in other similar cases of import of second hand cars, the said G.S. Prince was involved, the penalty imposed on the respondent was set aside. The Commissioner (Appeals) referred to the Final Order dated 8.6.2015 and 17.12.2014 of the Tribunal.
4. Revenue in the grounds of appeal stated that the Department has preferred appeal before the Honble Delhi High Court against the Tribunal order dated 17.12.2014 and 08.06.2015. the Ld. Advocate on behalf of the Respondent placed the copy of the decision of Honble Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Customs (Import & General), New Delhi vs Buhariwala Logistics & Anr., 2015-TIOL-2901-HC-DEL-Cus, wherein order dated 17.1.2014 of the Tribunal is upheld and the Revenue appeal was dismissed. Hence, there is no merits in the appeal of the Revenue.
5. In view of the above discussions, I do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). The appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.
(Operative portion of the order pronounced in open court) (S. K. Mohanty) Member(Judicial) Neha 2 | Page C/54467/2015-SM