Nawal Kishore Singh Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Delhi)
CESTAT Delhi held that statement made under section 108 of the Customs Act cannot be considered as relevant as the procedure contemplated under section 138B of the Customs Act was not followed. Thus, penalty imposed under section 112(a)(i) cannot be sustained.
Facts- This appeal has been filed by Nawal Kishore Singh to assail that portion of the order dated 31.03.2013 passed by the Commissioner ICD, TKD, New Delhi that imposes a penalty of Rs. 10 lakhs on the appellant under section 112(a)(i) of the Customs Act, 1962 for his acts of omission and commission in the smuggling of goods of foreign origin in collusion with Lokesh Garg, Kamal Sehgal and Krishan Kumar. The appellant, at the relevant time, was a G-Card holder of M/s Continental Cargo Services.
Conclusion- The provisions of section 138B(1)(b) of the Customs Act and section 9D of the Central Excise Act have been held to be mandatory and failure to comply with the procedure would mean that no reliance can be placed on the statements recorded either under section 108 of the Customs Act or under section 14D of the Central Excise Act. The Courts have also explained the rationale behind the precautions contained in the two sections. It has been observed that the statements recorded during inquiry/investigation by officers has every chance of being recorded under coercion or compulsion and it is in order to neutralize this possibility that statements of the witnesses have to be recorded before the adjudicating authority, after which such statements can be admitted in evidence.
