TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Customs House Agents Win Appeal: Section 112(a) Penalties Revoked After Tribunal Finds No Intentional Misconduct Evidence</h1> <h3>Shri Pallab Mitra Versus Commissioner of C.G.S.T. and C.X. Kolkata South Commissionerate And M/s. Banerjee Shipping Agency Versus Commissioner of C.G.S.T. and C.X. Kolkata South Commissionerate</h3> Shri Pallab Mitra Versus Commissioner of C.G.S.T. and C.X. Kolkata South Commissionerate And M/s. Banerjee Shipping Agency Versus Commissioner of C.G.S.T. ... Issues involved: Appeal against penalties imposed u/s 112(a) of Customs Act, 1962 for not checking antecedents of importer or representative before clearance as CHA. Summary: The appellants challenged penalties imposed on them for not verifying the antecedents of the importer or its representative before clearing a consignment as Customs House Agents (CHA). The impugned order was based on the misdeclaration of goods in the import documents. The appellants, employees of a shipping agency, argued that similar charges led to the suspension of their Customs Broker License, which was later revoked by the Calcutta High Court. They contended that the allegations should have been pursued under Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, not Customs Act. The respondent supported the penalties. The Tribunal noted that the only basis for penalties was the failure to check antecedents, not connivance with misdeclaration. Since proceedings under Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations were dropped, no penalties were justified, citing precedent in Chandan Chatterjee v. Commissioner of Customs (Port), Kolkata. Consequently, the penalties were revoked, and the appeals were allowed.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
