https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764095 CESTAT New Delhi allowed the appeal of a Customs House Agent challenging penalty under Section 112(a) of Customs Act. The tribunal found no evidence that the CHA abetted the importer's misdeclaration of imported goods. The Vice President's statement never implicated the CHA, and the original order placed responsibility solely on the importer. Without proof of connivance or abetment in filing Bills of Entry without mandatory documents, the penalty against the CHA could not be sustained and was set aside. en-us Mon, 23 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 03 Jan 2025 08:45:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764095 CESTAT New Delhi allowed the appeal of a Customs House Agent challenging penalty under Section 112(a) of Customs Act. The tribunal found no evidence that the CHA abetted the importer's misdeclaration of imported goods. The Vice President's statement never implicated the CHA, and the original order placed responsibility solely on the importer. Without proof of connivance or abetment in filing Bills of Entry without mandatory documents, the penalty against the CHA could not be sustained and was set aside. Case-Laws Customs Mon, 23 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764095