2015 (2) TMI 956

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the Handling of Cargo in Customs Area Regulation, 2009 and a further penalty of Rs. 1 lakh under Section 117 of the Customs Act for contravention of Regulations 6(2), 6(1)(k) and 6(1)(q) of the said Regulations read with Section 141 (2) of the Customs Act, 1962. Aggrieved of the same, the appellant is before me. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the charge against the appellant is that the appellant availed the services of transporters and cargo handlers, security agency, up-keeping and maintenance and also EDI services without obtaining prior permission from the Commissioner of Customs thereby contravening the provisions of Regulation 6(2). The appellant also contravened the provisions of Regulation 6(1)(k) inasmuch a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion 117 would not arise at all. It is also his submission that before engaging the private parties to undertake the various cargo handling activities, they had intimated to the Dy. Commissioner vide letter dated 05/11/2009 about their intention to engage the service providers. Therefore, it cannot be said that the department was unaware of the engagement of private agencies by the cargo service provider. In these circumstances, it is his plea that the imposition of penalty is not justifiable and therefore, the order be set aside. 4. The learned Additional Commissioner (AR), on the other hand, submits that the appellant failed to ensure secure and safe transfer of containers from one CFS, to another and in between the container was mis-used....