2020 (1) TMI 204

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e responsibility of paying the customs duty applicable on these goods with an understanding that such customs duty will be reimbursed to them along with other relevant charges. The customs broker has employed one Shri Parthiban to carry out this work. Shri Parthiban had deliberately misdeclared the quantity of the goods in both the bills of entry in order to reduce the customs duty liability. During the assessment of the bill of entry, it was found by the department that the value declared by the appellant was much lower than the value of contemporaneous imports. Accordingly, the assessment by the appellant under Section 17 of the Customs Act 1962 was revised through a reassessment by the officer under Section 17(4) of the Customs Act 1962.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the appellant. The appellant has paid the penalty imposed under Section 114AA. 3. Aggrieved by the order of the adjudicating authority, the Revenue has filed an appeal before the first appellate authority arguing that the penalties should have been imposed by the Deputy Commissioner upon the appellant customs broker under Section 114A of the Customs Act 1962 which has not been done. Agreeing with the appeal filed by the Revenue, the first appellate authority has imposed a penalty of Rs. 4,82,054/- under Section 114A upon the appellant. Aggrieved by the order, the present appeal has been filed. 4. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that it is true that they were the customs broker for the consignment in question and they had employ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....further that the benefit of reduced penalty under the first proviso shall be available subject to the condition that the amount of penalty so determined has also been paid within the period of thirty days referred to in that proviso : Provided also that where the duty or interest determined to be payable is reduced or increased by the Commissioner (Appeals), the Appellate Tribunal or, as the case may be, the court, then, for the purposes of this section, the duty or interest as reduced or increased, as the case may be, shall be taken into account : Provided also that in case where the duty or interest determined to be payable is increased by the Commissioner (Appeals), the Appellate Tribunal or, as the case may be, the court, then, the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....orts the impugned order. He would submit that in this particular factual matrix, the entire activity was outsourced by the importer to the appellant who himself as per the understanding, had undertaken to pay the entire customs duty. Therefore, the person who is liable to pay customs duty in this case was the appellant themselves and not necessarily the importers. It does not matter if the importer subsequently reimburses the customs duty to the appellant. Therefore Section 114A has been correctly invoked with respect to these goods. He also draws the attention of the Bench to regulation 11(g) of Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations 2013 which reads as follows: "Regulation 11 Obligations of Customs Broker.-A Custom Broker shall ... .....