GAGAN THAPER Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this appeal, the learned Counsel places reliance on the earlier Interim Stay Orders No. S/87 -90/06 -Cus. dated 29 -3 -2006 and S/83 -84/06 -Cus. dated 31 -3 -2006 whereunder it was observed that, no duty was demanded from those applicants and that the provisions of confiscation or penalty in respect of violation relating to antidumping duty were introduced w.e.f. 2004 and since the import was prior to that date, there was a case for waiver of penalty.

(2.) IN the present case, admittedly, the import was made prior to the year 2004 when by Finance (No. 2) Act, 2004 (23 of 2004), Sub -section (8) of Section 9A was substituted and the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962 relating to offences and penalties were also incorporated by reference for applying to antidumping duties, as they applied in relation to duties leviable under the Customs Act. The provisions of Sub -section (8) of Section 9A, prior to that substitution, incorporated the provisions of the Customs Act by reference which related to non -levy, short levy, refunds and appeals, while by the substituted portions, provisions relating to interest, offences and penalties were also incorporated.

(3.) IN this matter, however, we find from the impugned Order that not only anti -dumping duty amounts of Rs. 1,34,80,020/ - and Rs. 84,60,948/ - in respect of Bill of Entry Nos. 361632 dated 19 -6 -2003 and 158324 dated 2 -7 -2003 respectively were involved, but also customs duty amounts of Rs. 8,52,377/ -, Rs. 11,58,724/ -, Rs. 11,13,725/ - and Rs. 5,30,233/ - were involved. The learned Counsel, appearing for the appellant, contended that the Commissioner has erroneously relied upon the statement of the father of the appellant recorded under Section 108 of the Act. As regards this appellant, the Commissioner, in paragraph 75(vi), has reached a finding that he was an important link in the whole chain and had abetted Shri Anil Goel (of M/s. Maya Trading Co.) by willingly becoming as his disposal man for the impugned consignment sought to be cleared on misdeclared facts.