TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (8) TMI 256
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (D.R.I) examined an export cargo covered by two Shipping Bills No.2187801 dt. 15.12.2009 and 2192337 dt. 23.12.2009 filed in the name of Dhanalakshmi Exports, Chennai declared to consist of Free Flow Iodized salt, Rice Flake, Vathal etc. and consigned to M/s.Worldwide Agro Products Enterprises Unit, Malaysia. There were 520 yellow coloured HDPE bags in which salt was declared to be packed was examined and sent for testing and found to be in the form of white crystalline powder which answered the tests for Ketamine Hydrochloride. Accordingly, a show cause notice dt. 19.06.2010 was issued to M/s.Dhanalakshmi Exports, Shri A.P.T. Mahadevan and other noticees, inter alia proposing confiscation of quantity of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s (appellant in C/139/2011) and Shri B. Jawahar (appellant in C/140/2011). Ld. Advocate Ms.Nancy appears on behalf of appellant Shri C. Gunasekaran (C/66/2011). Ld. Advocate Shri B. Satish Sundar drew our attention to the following facts of the matter : i) The exporter by name A.P.T. Mahadevan has admitted his involvement. ii) Shri M.K. Manthiram (employee of CHA) in his statement has stated that they handled customs clearance with instructions of Shri V. Muthuraj of Vishwa Shipping Services (freight forwarder) and that they had handled earlier consignments for exports of Dhanalakshmi Exports. iii) As per Shri B. Jawahar, Partner of the CHA, inter alia in his statement has denied knowledge of the consignment and has stated that customs c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Act, 1962. vii) When the adjudicating authority has made a clear cut finding that appellant had no knowledge and had not involved by abetting in the attempted illicit export by the exporter leading to dropping of proposed penalty under Section 114AA, the imposition of penalty under Section 117 ibid is not justified. viii) The adjudicating authority has found that appellant committed violation of not getting authorized directly from the exporter and they did not verify genuineness and authenticity of the exporter. However such violation would attract action, if at all, under the Customs Agents Licensing Regulations, 2004 (CHALR) and not under the Customs Act, 1962. Ld. Advocate relies upon the following case laws which have clearly held t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....drawn is that the said appellant is not interested in pursuing the appeal. In the circumstances, we find it proper to dismiss Appeal C/104/2011 for non-prosecution. 6.2 In respect of the remaining appellants, we find that the matter has been more amply covered in their favour in the case of CC (Exports) Chennai Vs I. Sahaya Edin Prabhu - 2015 (320) ELT 264 (Mad.) wherein the Hon'ble High Court of Madras has held that for the failure of the CHA to discharge his functions, penalties are provided in the CHALR, and imposition of penalty under Section 114 (i) of the Customs Act is unwarranted. The relevant para of the order is reproduced as under : "7. The Tribunal has rendered a categoric finding that there is no finding of a positive role o....