Dismissed

Pr. Commissioner of Customs (Airport and Administration), Kolkata v. M/S. Brinks India Pvt. Ltd.

Calcutta HC10 Jul 2024CUSTA/35/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A revenue appeal challenged the Tribunal's setting aside a Section 112 Customs Act penalty on the respondent, which had only provided safe custody and transport services for imported gold. Finding no allegation of abetment in the show-cause notice and no substantial question of law, the High Court dismissed the appeal and the stay application.

What did the court decide?

Appeal dismissed; stay application IA No: GA/2/2024 also dismissed.

Pr. Commissioner of Customs (Airport and… — Customs and Excise | Calcutta HC (2024)

¶1

¶2

OD-4

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA SPECIAL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE

¶4

CUSTA/35/2024 IA NO:GA/2/2024

¶5

PR. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (AIRPORT & ADMINISTRATION), KOLKATA VS M/S. BRINK’S INDIA PVT. LTD.

¶6

BEFORE :

¶7

THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM And

¶8

THE HON’BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA Date : 10^th July, 2024

¶9

Appearance : Mr. K.K. Maiti, Adv. Mr. Tapan Bhanja, Adv. … for the appellant

¶10

Mr. Biswajit Mukherjee, Adv. Mr. Soumyajit Mishra, Adv.

¶11

Mr. S.K. Mohapatra, Adv. Mr. Sudipta Ghosh, Adv. Mr. Bikash Kumar Roy, Adv. …for the respondents

¶12

The Court : This appeal by the revenue is directed against the order

¶13

passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Eastern Zonal Bench, Kolkata (the Tribunal) in Appeal No. 75659 of 2021, dated 25^th

¶14

¶15

July, 2023. The revenue has suggested the following substantial questions of law for consideration :

¶16

“Whether the Learned Tribunal has committed gross error of law by setting aside the penalty imposed upon the respondent under Section 112 of the Customs Act when it is apparent that the respondent has abated the importer to avail gold without proper payment of duties ?” We have heard the learned Advocates for the parties.

¶17

Admittedly, the respondent was not the importer of the gold but provided service keeping safe custody of the gold imported in the Bin warehouse and transporting the same to the correct destination. The import took place in the year 2014 and show-cause notice was issued to all the noticees and the respondent herein M/s. Brink’s India Pvt. Ltd. was also one of the co-noticees along with Shri Ganesh Jewellery House, M/s. Ocean Shipping and Clearing Agency, Indo Friends Agency.

¶18

As rightly pointed out by the learned Advocate for the respondent that there is no allegation against the respondent in the show-cause notice of any abetment or connivance with the importer. This aspect has been clearly brought out by the learned Tribunal in its order, as could be seen from paragraphs 14 to 16 of the impugned order. This factual position could not be controverted by the department.

¶19

¶20

Thus, we find no questions of law, much less substantial question of law,

¶21

arises for consideration in this appeal.

¶22

Accordingly, the appeal fails and is dismissed.

¶23

The stay application IA No:GA/2/2024 is also dismissed.

¶24

(T.S. SIVAGNANAM, C.J.)

¶25

(HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA, J.)

¶26

SN. AR(CR)

Pr. Commissioner of Customs (Airport and Administration), Kolkata v. M/S. Brinks India Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Pr. Commissioner of Customs (Airport and Administration), Kolkata v. M/S. Brinks India Pvt. Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Commissioner of Central Excise and Service Tax Haldia Vs M/S Sarvopari Impex Pvt. Ltd.

Commissioner of Customs Port Kolkata Vs M/S P D Associates

Commissioner of Service Tax, Kolkata Vs M/S. G. S. Atwal and Co. Engineering Pvt. Ltd.

Pr. Commissioner of Customs (Airport and Administration), Kolkata Vs M/S. Ocean Shipping and Clearing Agency

Pr. Commissioner of Customs (Airport and Administration), Kolkata Vs M/S. Indo Friends Agency

Commissioner Of Customs Port Kolkata Vs Shri Rakesh Magoo