COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS Vs. BALDEV SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are three appeals preferred by Revenue praying for imposition of penalty under Section 112 (a) of Customs and Rule 209A of Central Excise Rules on three respondents who are Directors in M/s. Imaging Software Ltd.

(2.) When the matter was called, no one was present on behalf of the respondents and the notice issued for intimating the date of hearing has been received back from the postal authorities with the remarks "this firm has been closed, returned to sender". We, therefore, heard Shri V. Valte, learned Senior Departmental Representative and perused the records.

(3.) The learned Senior Departmental Representative submitted that the respondents are the Directors in M/s. Imaging Software Ltd., a unit set up in Noida Export Processing Zone; that they imported capital goods from abroad and also procured capital goods indigenously without payment of Customs duly and Central Excise duty; that the Commissioner under the impugned Order confiscated both the imported goods as well as impugned goods with an option to redeem the same and imposed a penalty of Rs. One lakh under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act and Rs. 50,000/ - under Rule 209 of the Central Excise Rules on M/s. Imaging Software Ltd; that, however, the Commissioner did not impose any penalty on the respondents; that penal action against the Director of the Company should have been taken on the same ground as in the case of the Company itself since it is well known fact that the Company cannot act on its own; that it was also required on the part of the Directors to keep proper account of import, consumption and utilization of the same and to produce evidence for verification on being asked which they failed to do so; that the respondents have acted without showing responsibilities which are warranted since they neither replied nor appeared in personal hearing when the case was posted; that they never co -operated with the Government. Learned Senior Departmental Representative also mentioned that the Appeal filed by the Company has been finally decided by the Tribunal vide Final Order No. 409/2002 -B, dated 25 -8 -2002 [2003 (155) E.L.T. 60 (T)] by which the Tribunal has upheld the Order but reduced the redemption fine and penalties imposed on the Company.