Customs broker penalized for facilitating export of prohibited goods, despite minimal profit, stresses compliance and due diligence

The Member (Judicial) dismissed the rectification of mistake application, upholding the penalty of Rs. 80,000 imposed on the appellant-customs broker for facilitating the export of prohibited goods. Despite not profiting significantly from the illegal transaction, the appellant's lack of due diligence and vigilance in relying on freight forwarders for documentation contributed to the facilitation of the prohibited export. The decision emphasizes the importance of ensuring compliance with regulations and actively preventing the export of prohibited goods in handling export transactions.

---

---

Issues Involved:
Rectification of mistake application regarding penalty imposed on appellant-customs broker for facilitating export of prohibited goods.

Analysis:
1. The appellant, a Customs House Agent (CHA), filed an airway shipping bill on behalf of an exporter, declaring clutch plates for vehicles. However, upon examination, prohibited goods (red sanders) were found instead of the declared items. Subsequently, a penalty of Rs. 8 lakhs was imposed on the appellant under section 114 of the Act.

2. The appellant and co-noticees appealed against the penalty, leading to a final order reducing the penalty to Rs. 80,000. The Tribunal observed that the appellants were not involved in making profits from the export of prohibited goods but were working on a normal remuneration basis. The appeal was partially allowed based on this finding.

3. The appellant challenged certain observations in the final order, claiming that there were no allegations regarding earlier consignments with prohibited goods. The appellant argued that they had followed KYC norms, submitted correct documents, and had no requirement to physically verify goods. The appellant also cited a precedent where knowledge of offending goods was deemed necessary for penalty imposition.

4. The Authorized Representative for the Revenue opposed the rectification application, stating that it was an attempt for a review or rehearing of the appeal, which was not permissible.

5. Upon review, the Member (Judicial) found that the appellant had not met the exporter or relevant persons involved in the transactions, relying heavily on freight forwarders for documentation. It was noted that while the appellant did not gain significantly from the attempted export of prohibited goods, negligence or lack of vigilance on their part facilitated the export.

6. The Member concluded that there was no error in the final order, dismissing the rectification of mistake application. The decision was based on the finding that despite not benefiting greatly from the prohibited export, the appellant's actions contributed to the facilitation of the illegal transaction.

In conclusion, the judgment upheld the penalty imposed on the appellant-customs broker, emphasizing the importance of due diligence and vigilance in handling export transactions to prevent the facilitation of prohibited goods.

---