A.P. SALES Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, HYDERABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE applicant is working as a Superintendent of Vasco -da -Gama Range. He has been charged under Section 114 of the Customs Act along with the Inspector, Shri V.A. Naik, for having colluded with the exporter in over -invoicing the goods. He has been imposed with a penalty of Rs. 25,000/ -. The stay application of other parties were not listed. The Commissioner, in the impugned order, has examined the entire evidence on record and has also relied on several judgments of the Tribunal to uphold the charge against the appellants.

(2.) THE learned Counsel submits that the applicant is innocent of the offence and he has discharged his duties diligently. The Counsel points out that the Commissioner himself has noted that there is dereliction of duty but yet it has not been proved that the applicant had any extraneous consideration for his actions. The learned Counsel submits that the Commissioner should not have proceeded to impose the penalty.

(3.) THE learned SDR defends the order and points out to several evidence available on record which show that the applicant had committed mistakes deliberately to help the exporters to over -invoice the goods. He prays for dismissal of the stay application.