Manager's penalty reduced for limited role in mis-declaration of goods

The Tribunal reduced the penalty imposed on the appellant, a Manager of a CHA firm involved in mis-declaration of imported goods, from Rs. 2 lakhs to Rs. 20,000 due to his limited role and financial circumstances. Despite evidence of his complicity in illegal activities, including a retracted statement admitting involvement, the Tribunal considered his employment status and overall circumstances in mitigating the penalty.

---

---

Issues:
Mis-declaration of imported goods, penalty imposition on appellant, retraction of statement, involvement in illegal activities, leniency in penalty imposition.

Analysis:
The case involved an importer, M/s Pride International Trading, who was found mis-declaring a consignment of goods imported from UAE. The Customs seal of the container was broken, revealing excess goods valued significantly higher than the declared amount. An investigation ensued, leading to penalties imposed on various individuals, including the appellant, who was a Manager of a CHA firm. The appellant contested the allegations, claiming coercion during statement recording and denying involvement in the illegal removal of goods from the container.

The appellant requested cross-examination of witnesses and relevant documents, which were not provided to him. He cited an RTI application seeking the import application, which the port trust claimed not to possess. The appellant disassociated himself from the plan to remove goods illegally and sought the penalty's revocation. The Authorized Representative highlighted the appellant's retracted statement, alleging his role in facilitating the illegal removal of goods from the container.

The Tribunal considered both parties' submissions and noted the appellant's retracted statement during the reply to the show-cause notice. The statement detailed the appellant's involvement in a plan to remove undeclared goods from the container with the help of others. The Tribunal concluded that the appellant's position as a Manager of the CHA firm, coupled with the evidence of undeclared goods and broken container seal, indicated his complicity in the illegal activities.

Despite the substantial penalty imposed on the appellant and the significant value of the goods involved, the Tribunal acknowledged his limited role and financial circumstances. Consequently, the Tribunal decided to reduce the penalty from Rs. 2 lakhs to Rs. 20,000, considering the appellant's employment status and the overall circumstances. The judgment was pronounced in open court, modifying the penalty amount or rejecting the appeal based on the revised penalty imposition.

---