2019 (9) TMI 134

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he Customs Act, 1962. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellant who is working as Custom House Agent (CHA) were authorized by M/s. Weir Minerals India Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as Weir/importer) to collect the documents pertaining to Bill of Lading No.KEH305320 dated 26.11.2011 from M/s. Panalpina being the freight forwarder and clear the consignment. Thereafter, the appellant prepared a checklist on the basis of the documents provided by M/s. Panalpina with details of M/s. Auma Riester GmbH & Co. Germany as the supplier and valued at 1,79,925 EUR as mentioned in the invoice. The said checklist was forwarded to Weir and upon approval from Weir, the appellant filed the bill of Entry No.5669696 dat....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....commercial consignment, the appellant prepared the checklist based on invoice dated 2.11.2011 of Auma and upon approval from Weir, they filed the documents with the Customs. She further submitted that the appellants have acted with due diligence in ascertaining whether the shipment is a commercial shipment and preparing the checklist based on the invoices provided to them. Further whether the Bill of Entry contains the declaration as contained in the invoices, the allegation of mis-declaration is not sustainable against the appellant. She also submitted that only after confirmation by Weir, the appellant have filed the Bill of Entry and the above facts were submitted before the adjudicating authority and the appellate authority against whic....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 2018 (364) ELT 427 (Tri.-Del.) • Falcon India vs. Commissioner of Customs, ICD, Tughlakabad, New Delhi: 2018 (363) ELT 835 (Tri.-Del.) • Rajesh Maikhuri vs. Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi: 2018 (363) ELT 274 (Tri.-Del.) • Chakreshwari Shipping Agency P. Ltd. vs. CC (ACC & Export), Mumbai: 2014 (310) ELT 614 (Tri.-Mumbai). 4.1 Inasmuch as they have not acted with intent to enable the importer to evade duty payment. In support of this submission, she relied upon the following decisions: • Mahendra Shah vs. CC, Mumbai: 2010 (261) ELT 497 • M.J. Joshy vs. CC, Chennai: 2010 (258) ELT 460 (Tri.-Chennai) 4.2 She also submitted that the penalty on the appellant cannot be im....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Further, I find that the department has not brought any evidence on record to prove that the appellant had the knowledge of the final invoice or the payment made by Weir to M/s. Barron. This issue has been considered in many decisions of the Tribunal and it has been consistently held that if there is no evidence of aiding and abetting against the CHA, then penalty cannot be imposed on CHA. In the case of Falcon India cited supra, the Division Bench of CESTAT, Delhi in identical circumstances in para 4 has held as under: "4. After hearing both sides and on perusal of record, it appears that what the documents were supplied by M/s. JMD India, the appellant has filed Bill of Entry on the basis of the papers where the number of boxes w....