V.K. JAIN, J.

1. This appeal under Section 130 of Customs Act, 1962 is directed against the order dated 04.06.2009 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), whereby it allowed the appeal filed by the respondent against Order-in-Original No. KRB/ACE/08/05 dated 09.06.2005 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Exports) and imposed a penalty of Rs10,000/- upon the appellant.

2. The following question of law arises for our consideration in this case:

"Whether the finding of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal that the appellant is liable for penalty under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 on the charge of abetment is perverse?"

3. On 12.10.2002, the officers of Directorate General of Revenue Intelligence, on receipt of information regarding smuggling of contraband goods through speed post parcels, visited Speed Post Centre at Bhai Vir Singh Marg, New Delhi and identified 8 parcels, including 4 parcels received from Singapore and addressed to M/s Beam Technology. It was noticed that the declaration, pasted on these parcels, did not contain information regarding description, value and quantity of goods, in terms of Section 82 of Customs Act. On opening the parcels, they were found to contain computer parts which attracted payment of custom duty. It was also found that the description and quantity of the goods, as noted in the invoice, found in the parcels, were different from the actual description, quantity and value of the goods. Since the goods appeared to be illegally imported into India, the same were placed under seizure. During the course of enquiry, statement of one Kumesh Chauhan, who had earlier been delivering parcels to M/s Beam Technology, was recorded. He informed that 9 similar parcels, addressed to Shri Sandeep Sehgal at the address of M/s Beam Technology, were delivered by him on 11.01.2002 and no custom duty was charged in respect of those articles. Those 9 parcels were cleared for duty free delivery by Shri Rajesh Kumar, Customs Inspector posted at that Centre. In his statement, Shri Rajesh Kumar, Customs Inspector admitted that in respect of the 9 parcels, which were marked by him for duty free delivery, there was no customs declaration and those parcels were similar to the 4 parcels seized by DRI on 12.10.2002. On enquiry being made from the appellant Vishnu Kumar, who was a Sorting Assistant in the Centre, he stated that one Kishori Lal, who was posted as a Postal Clerk at Foreign Post Office and was his friend had asked him to keep a watch on parcels meant for some parties, including M/s Beam Technology and M/s Abhishek Electronics and inform him about their arrival. He further stated that he used to do the needful on account of his friendship with Kishori Lal and that all the parcels, regarding which Kishori Lal had made enquiries, were sent directly to the parties for duty free delivery, without sending them to Foreign Post Office for customs examination. He also admitted that on 11.10.2002, 9 parcels of M/s Beam Technology and two parcels of M/s Abhishek Electronics had been cleared by Shri Rajesh Kumar, Customs Inspector for duty free delivery. In his statement, Shri Kishori Lal stated that one Sandeep Sehgal, proprietor of M/s Beam Technology, used to approach him and pay him Rs15,000/- per parcel to get them cleared, without payment of duty and that he used to share this money with Rajesh Kumar, Customs Inspector. He also admitted that 9 parcels cleared on 11.10.2002, in the name of M/s Beam Technology, were cleared for duty free delivery, with the help of Customs Inspector Shri Rajesh Kumar. He further stated that between August, 2002 to 11th October, 2002, he had got cleared about 30-40 parcels, containing computer parts, without payment of duty and had received Rs 5 lakhs, half of which, was given by him to Shri Rajesh Kumar. He stated that he did not inform the appellant Vishnu Kumar about the contents of the parcels though he had give