Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

36.3. Shri N.S. Narulla, Director of the notice-company has submitted that being the Director of the importing company, he had signed the undertaking submitted to the department as required under Notification No. 21/2002; that he had signed the undertaking which was the requirement at the time of import of the goods and 40 C/317,318,319,320/2010 accepted by the Customs authorities while permitting clearance of the goods with exemption for and on behalf of the company and this will not make him liable to penalty as alleged in the show-cause notice. I find that not only has Shri N.S. Narulla abetted in claiming improper duty exemption, the condition 40 (b) of the Notification under which the undertaking was submitted itself has been violated with his firm knowledge who had undertaken to be bound by it. Thus, he is also liable to penal action under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962. 36.4. Finally, I come to the penal liability of Shri R.K. Agnihotri, Executive Dirctor of the notice-company. He has submitted that all his actions in the context of clearance of the goods and subsequent thereto are in the capacity as Executive Director of the notice-company. He has submitted that all his actions in the context of clearance of the goods and subsequent thereto are in the capacity as Executive Director of the notice-company; that none of his actions are distinguishable from the actions of the importing firm; that he has not done anything in his personal capacity to render the goods in question liable to consfication by his individual acts of omission or commission as contemplated under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962; that he had not dealt with the goods for his personal benefit in any manner as contemplated under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act so as to render himself liable to penalty thereunder. However, Shri R.K. Agnihotri in the position of Executive Director of M/s D.S. Constructions Ltd. had complete knowledge about the conditions of the Notification and that being the case abetted in usage of the goods at an ineligible contract other than that declared to the department and in disposal of the same before the stipulated period as set out in Condition 40 (b) of the Notification. Thus, I hold him liable to penal action under Section 112 of the Customs Act, 1962."