Page 252 - ELT_2nd_15th April 2020_Vol 372_Part

298 EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 372

tained in the impugned communication dated 7-4-2018 were for provisional re-
lease of the goods and in absence of final determination of the duty liability, the
appeal filed by the appellant can be considered as pre-mature and cannot be en-
tertained by the Tribunal at this juncture.
4. Therefore, we do not find any merits in the appeal filed by the appel-
lant. Accordingly same is dismissed.
(Operative part of the order pronounced in the open Court)
_______
2020 (372) E.L.T. 298 (Tri. - Del.)
IN THE CESTAT, PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
[COURT NO. II]
S/Shri Anil Choudhary, Member (J) and Bijay Kumar, Member (T)
AMAN BADHWAR
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, NEW DELHI
Final Order No. 53625/2018-Cu(DB), dated 22-10-2018 in Appeal
No. C/51993/2018
Penalty - Quantum of - Appellant, a student pursuing Hotel Manage-
ment courses after completing his graduation, unknowingly used by his
cousin and other person by giving them offer of free tour of Hong Kong - Ap-
pellant also signed the documents of bank accounts in connection of company
in the name of Moral Colour Limited at Hong Kong - Appellant was an adult
aged about 22 years - Thus it cannot be said that appellant was of tender age
and innocent - No record that appellant knowingly did the acts of omission
and commission during his pleasure trip to Hong Kong - However, appellant
was paid about ` 20,000 by cousin brothers and thus appellant lured in signing
various documents for opening of bank account in connection with the com-
pany, without much understanding the consequences - Penalty rightly im-
posed however, excessive - Penalty reduced from ` 1,00,000 to ` 25,000 - Section
114A of Customs Act, 1962. [paras 32, 33]
Appeal partly allowed
REPRESENTED BY : Shri B.L. Soni, Consultant, for the Appellant.
Shri Rakesh Kumar, Authorised Representative, for
the Respondent.
[Order per : Anil Choudhary, Member (J)]. - The issue in this appeal is
whether the appellant has been rightly imposed penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/- under
Section 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962.
2. The brief facts are that the appellant had completed his graduation
and was pursuing Hotel Management from IHM Bangalore. During February,
2013 when appellant’s maternal cousin Shri Anirudh Palta asked him to accom-
pany him to visit his (Anirudh’s) brother- Bhavuk Palta, who has been residing
in Hong Kong for the past 7-8 years. Shri Anirudh had told him that his brother
Bhavuk had asked him to visit Hong Kong along with 6-7 friends. Expenses for
the visit were to be borne by Shri Bhavuk Palta.
EXCISE LAW TIMES  15th April 2020  268