CHA employee penalized under sections 114(iii) and 114A for filing benami shipping bills with false declarations to claim ineligible drawback

CESTAT New Delhi upheld penalties under sections 114(iii) and 114A of the Customs Act against a CHA employee/manager for filing benami shipping bills with mis-declared descriptions, quantities, and values to obtain ineligible drawback. The tribunal rejected appellant's defense of lack of awareness regarding dummy IEC holder, emphasizing duty to verify exporter's authenticity. The court found willful mis-declaration constituted abetment of offense, making penalties justified considering goods' value involved.

---

---

Issues Involved:
- Imposition of penalties under section 114 (iii) and 114A of the Customs Act, 1962 on the appellant.

Summary:
1. Facts of the Case: The Directorate of Revenue Intelligence received intelligence about mis-declaration of export consignments to avail ineligible drawback. Goods examined were found to be mis-declared in nature and values inflated.

2. Appeal C/50306 of 2021: Shipping bills mis-declared, goods found different from declaration, inflated values. Appellant filed bills at behest of another, mis-declared to fraudulently obtain excess drawback. Penalties imposed under section 114 (iii) and 114AA upheld.

3. Appeal C/50198 of 2021: Similar facts as above, penalty of Rs. 15,00,000 imposed, upheld by Commissioner (Appeals).

4. Appeal C/50199 of 2021: Identical facts, penalty of Rs. 5,00,000 imposed, upheld by Commissioner (Appeals).

5. Legal Analysis: Appellant not represented in hearings, penalties imposed u/s 114 (iii) and 114AA challenged. Sections 114 (iii) and 114AA of the Customs Act cited for penalties exceeding value of goods and for false declarations, respectively.

6. Decision Justification: Mis-declaration undisputed, appellant filed benami bills for fraudulent claims. Appellant's lack of knowledge not accepted, penalties justified. Appellant's submissions rejected, penalties not excessive. Orders upheld, appeals dismissed.

7. Conclusion: Impugned orders upheld, penalties under section 114 (iii) and 114AA sustained, appeals dismissed.

---