SHRI VAMAN KUNDER Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (ADJ.)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against Order -in -Original No. 151/2002 dated 22.3.2002, wherein the adjudicating authority has imposed a personal penalty of Rs. 25,000/ - under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962 on the appellant.

(2.) THE necessary facts that arise for consideration are that on the basis of intelligence, one M/s Sali Exports, Mumbai was investigated by DRI, Mumbai. During the investigation, it was found that the said exporter M/s Sali Export has exported goods of FOB value Rs. 3,08,65,957/ - and obtained duty drawback of Rs. 47,68,841/ - under five shipping bills. The DRI officers searched the residential premises of M/s Sali Exports with others and recorded statement of many persons. On conclusion of the investigation, a show cause notice was issued to said M/s Sali Export for wrongful claim of non -eligible duty drawback by over -valuing the exports and that they have fraudulently manipulated to change the description, quantity and value (FOB & PMV). Show cause notice was also issued to the appellant herein for imposition of penalty for his role of aiding and abetting, the acts and omissions, which resulted in rendering the export consignment under five shipping bills liable to confiscation under Section 113 of the Customs Act, 1962. The appellant herein denied all the allegations before the adjudicating authority and added that during the relevant period M/s Elegance Shipping Agency had three directors and one of them was this appellant. The appellant submitted before adjudicating authority that he was only looking after the office administration i.e. liaison work with steamer agents. The adjudicating authority after considering the submission made by the appellant come to conclusion that the appellant has aided and abetted the main exporter, hence, is liable for imposition of penalty. Hence, this appeal.

(3.) LEARNED SDR, on the other hand, submits that the appellant was Director of shipping agency. It is his submission that the appellant in his statement given under Section 108, said that they are using the licence of M/s Jai International, CHA and paying them Rs. 5000/ - per month for utilizing CHA's licence. It is his submission that over -valuation and mis -declaration of the goods, was known to the appellant. He submits that appellant sent one of the staff alongwith the exporter, to shipping company to change the description of the goods. It is his further submission that one Shri Salim Seikh has clearly indicated that the goods were highly over -invoiced and this fact was brought to the knowledge of appellant by him. He reiterates the findings of the adjudicating authority.