https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766361 CESTAT New Delhi allowed the appeal of a customs house agent (CHA) who faced penalties under sections 114(i), 114(iii), and 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962. The department alleged the CHA facilitated siphoning of duty drawback through export of inferior quality garments at overvalued prices. The Tribunal found the CHA had conducted proper due diligence by obtaining KYC documents and following prescribed procedures. All export consignments were cleared after scrutiny without objections regarding quality or value. The Tribunal held that CHAs are processing agents, not inspectors responsible for verifying transaction genuineness. The department failed to produce evidence proving lack of due diligence or that the CHA benefited from any alleged violations. The penalty was set aside. en-us Fri, 21 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 24 Feb 2025 08:05:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766361 CESTAT New Delhi allowed the appeal of a customs house agent (CHA) who faced penalties under sections 114(i), 114(iii), and 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962. The department alleged the CHA facilitated siphoning of duty drawback through export of inferior quality garments at overvalued prices. The Tribunal found the CHA had conducted proper due diligence by obtaining KYC documents and following prescribed procedures. All export consignments were cleared after scrutiny without objections regarding quality or value. The Tribunal held that CHAs are processing agents, not inspectors responsible for verifying transaction genuineness. The department failed to produce evidence proving lack of due diligence or that the CHA benefited from any alleged violations. The penalty was set aside. Case-Laws Customs Fri, 21 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766361