Penalty can be Imposed when any Person Committed Act of Omission in relation to Goods Rendered for Confiscation u/s 112(a) of Customs Act: Delhi HC [Read Order]

In a recent case, the Delhi High Court held that the penalty can be only imposed when any person committed an act of omission to goods or services rendered for confiscation under section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. 

Rajeev Khatri, the appellant assessee appealed against the order of adjudicating authority for imposing a penalty on the assessee under section 112(a) of the Customs Act. 

The counsel for the assessee contended that he was informed that an employee of the importer was on the way to bring the necessary documents and further activities such as steps for examination of goods would be undertaken by the customs authorities, only after the requisite documents were submitted. 

It was further submitted that the adjudicating authority failed to examine the proper documents which were submitted by the assessee and imposed a penalty that was not as per the law. 

Narain, the counsel for the revenue contended that the assessee had filed the bill of entry for the import of goods, which were found to be prohibited, was sufficient to impose a penalty under section 112(a) of the Customs Act and it was not essential to establish men's rea for imposing such penalty. 

The Court observed that the persons who have committed acts of omission or commission to goods that rendered them liable for confiscation are liable to pay the penalty as stipulated under section 112(a) of the Customs Act, without any requirement to establish their mal intent. 

The two-member bench comprising Vibhu Bakhru and Amit Mahajan held that the penalty imposed on the assessee under section 112(a) of the Customs Act was not sustainable and quashed while allowing the appeal filed by the assessee. 

To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates