KODY TECK LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is against the following order of the Commissioner of Customs:

(2.) HEARD both sides, Learned Consultant for the appellants submitted that they were not pursuing their challenge against the first part of the above order. In relation to the second part of the impugned order, he submitted that the subject imports had been made prior to 28 -9 -1996 (the date on which Section 114A of the Customs Act came into force) and, therefore, the penalty imposed on the appellants under Section 114A was not sustainable. Analogy was drawn between this provision and Section 11AC of the Central Excise Act and it was submitted that it had been repeatedly held by this Tribunal that no penalty was imposable on a person under Section 11AC for offence committed by him prior to the date on which the said Section came into force. In this connection, learned Consultant relied on the P and H High Court's decision in Union of India v. Bhasin and Co. as also decisions of this Tribunal in a number of cases including Odayappan v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Trichy ].

(3.) AFTER considering the above submissions and hearing learned SDR, we find that it is not in dispute that the goods in question were imported and cleared prior to 28 -9 -1996. It is settled law that a penal provision has no retrospective effect unless otherwise specified in the provision itself. Section 114A of the Customs Act did not have retrospective operation and hence would not be applicable to the offence alleged against the appellants. Hence the penalty imposed on them is vacated. The appeal is allowed only to this extent.