2008 (10) TMI 524 - AT - Customs

Penalty Overturned: Lack of Evidence in Foreign Exchange Export Case

TRADE WINGS LTD. Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, MUMBAI

The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai, set aside the penalty imposed on a Full Fledged Money Changer for alleged indirect abetment in illegal foreign ... Penalty - Abetment in attempt to illegally export Traveller’s cheque - Held that:- As regards the appellants, there is no evidence to show that they were aware that the foreign exchange released by them would form part of an attempt of unauthorized export - However, lack of care and diligence by the appellants is not sufficient to pin them with the charge of abetment of the attempt of illegal export of Traveller cheques. Penalties not sustainable - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. Issues:Penalty imposition on Full Fledged Money Changer for indirect abetment in illegal export of foreign exchange through Travellers Cheques.Analysis:The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Mumbai, heard the case where a penalty of Rs. 1,50,000/- was imposed on the appellants, a Full Fledged Money Changer, for allegedly indirectly abetting in the illegal export of foreign exchange. The allegation was based on the appellants' association with another FFMC, Travel Club, and their role in issuing foreign exchange to passengers traveling abroad. The appellants' Front Office Executive released Travellers Cheques to passengers at the instance of Travel Club, which were later found in possession of Shri Ravindranath, the Director of Travel Club, who was intercepted while attempting to board a flight to Hong Kong.The Tribunal noted that there was no evidence to establish that the appellants were aware of the intended unauthorized export of foreign exchange. While the Commissioner held the appellants responsible for lack of due care and diligence in issuing Travellers Cheques without observing RBI guidelines, it was deemed insufficient to prove abetment in the illegal export attempt. The Tribunal emphasized that the appellants' lack of care and diligence did not directly link them to the illegal export, leading to the conclusion that the penalty imposed on the appellants was not justified.Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order concerning the appellants and allowed the appeal, ruling in favor of the appellants by overturning the penalty imposed on them. The judgment highlighted the importance of establishing direct involvement or knowledge in illegal activities to hold parties liable for abetment, emphasizing the need for clear evidence linking individuals or entities to the alleged offenses to uphold penalties in such cases.