Customs House Agent Wins Appeal: Penalty Overturned Due to Insufficient Evidence and Procedural Flaws Under Section 112A

CESTAT Mumbai allowed appeal against penalty under Customs Act section 112A. Tribunal found penalty order invalid due to lack of natural justice, absence of direct evidence against appellant, and reliance solely on statements from third parties. The order was set aside, emphasizing the need for fair investigation and corroborated evidence before imposing penalties on Customs House Agent.

---

---

The Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT Mumbai) reviewed the legality of a penalty imposed under section 112A of the Customs Act, 1962 on the appellant, a Customs House Agent (CHA). The penalty arose from a show-cause notice based solely on statements from the importer and another CHA director, without summoning the appellant for statement or seizing any documents from the appellant during investigation.The Commissioner (Appeals) had upheld the penalty, reasoning that recording the appellant's statement was not a prerequisite for imposing penalty under section 112A. However, the Tribunal disagreed, emphasizing violation of the principle of natural justice by not allowing the appellant to defend itself during investigation. The Tribunal relied on section 114 Illustration (b) of the Indian Evidence Act, which holds that "statement of accomplice /co-accused is unworthy of credit unless he is corroborated with material particulars."The appellant's counsel cited precedents-Enterprise International Ltd v. Commissioner of Customs (2010 (259) E.L.T. 629) and Warren Trading Pvt. Ltd v. Commissioner of Customs (2008 (222) E.L.T. 313)-establishing that penalties are unsustainable where no investigation or incriminating evidence involves the appellant directly.Accordingly, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the penalty order of Rs. 10 lakhs imposed on the appellant CHA M/s. S A Dalal And Co, granting consequential relief. The Tribunal underscored the necessity of fair investigation and corroborated evidence before penalizing under section 112A.

---