AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (4) TMI 381
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....all the appellants herein (who are categorized as Importers and their employee, Tank Storage Terminal and their employees, CHA and their employees, Authorized Signatories for CHA etc.) are held liable for penalty under the provisions of Sec. 112(a) of the Customs Act 1962 on the ground that they had engaged in defrauding of Customs Duty to the exchequer. On an investigation, it was noticed by the authorities that Shri Malleshwar Rao and Shri Jayesh were engaged in forging the signatures of the cashier of the Customs Dept. on the TR6 challans and forging signatures of Customs Officers on the reverse of photo copy of the duplicate copy of Bill of Entry and cleared consignments from the tank terminals. The modus operandi of Shri Malleshwar Rao....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bsp; 2. Shri Nachikep Deepakbhai Antani, Employee of M/s United Tank Ter. 3. M/s JR Enterprises- 4. Shri Neeraj Morari Lal, Employee of M/s J R Enterprises 5. M/s J K Synthetics Ltd- 6. Shri Rajesh Soni ] Shri P V Seth (Adv.) 7. Shri Govind Prakash Agarwal ] 2. CHA EMPLOYEES 1. Shri Jayesh Mistry Authorised Signatory of CHA 2. M/s Kiran Shipping Pvt Ltd -3. Shri Mahesh Gupta Employee of M/s Kiran Shipping ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... signatures on the Bill of Entry were forged. 5. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the CHAs and individuals would submit that the Adjudicating Authority in the impugned Order has specifically recorded that the entire master mind of forging the signature of the customs officer and cashier of Customs is one Shri Malleshwar Rao and it also recorded that Shri Malleshwar Rao has admitted to such activity on his part. It is his submission that the penalties imposed on their clients is in correct as they would not be aware of the forgery committed by Shri Malleshwar Rao. 6. Ld Counsel appearing on behalf of Shri P V Jayesh would submit that he had forged signature of the Customs Appraiser on being instructed by Shri Malleshwa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion 111 (a) of the Customs Act, 1962, holding that the importers were liable to be penalised due to their actions of purchasing the demand draft from any individual with whom they were not well acquainted and by doing so they have committed and contravened of provisions of law due to which the goods became liable for confiscation; the CHA and their agents and employees are penalised for not having effective control over the individual and defrauders; and the storage terminals are penalised for not being vigilant and clearing the consignments on the photo copy of the duplicate Bill of Entry (ex-bond). 11. It is undisputed that except for a small amount, the importers have paid customs duty that arose in these appeals. It is also undisput....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or setting aside the penalty imposed on them. The above view is fortified by the following decisions : 1. M/s ITW India Ltd vs Commissioner of Customs, Chennai - 2006 (198) ELT.117 (Tri.Bang.) 2. M/s Hetero Drugs Ltd vs. Commissioner of Customs, Chennai - 2004 (168)ELT. 211 (Tri. Bang.) 13. As regards the penalties imposed on the CHA and the proprietors of CHA, I find that the Adjudicating Authority has specifically recorded that one Shri Malleshwar Rao is the master mind of the entire fraud committed on the Revenue. There is noting on record which indicates that the CHA or power of attorney holder or the proprietor of CHA were aware the actions of the individuals ....