AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (9) TMI 604
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../- (Rupees One Lakh only) and also reduced the penalty imposed on Sachin Kumar and Ravichandra alias Ravi to Rs. 50,000/- each (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962. Since all the three appeals arise out of the same facts and common impugned order, therefore all the three appeals are taken together for discussion and disposal. For the sake of convenience, I take the facts of Appeal No. C/20053/2020. 2. Briefly the facts of the case are that the appellant Sachin Kumar is a transport agent and he arranged the truck for the exporter namely, M/s. Beracha Exim Private Ltd. for factory stuffing at Bangalore for export of goods through NMPT, Mangalore. The truck from Mangalore reached KSDL factory, Bangalore an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppeal before the Commissioner, the penalty on the appellant Venugopal was reduced to Rs. 1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lakh only) and on the other appellants namely Sachin Kumar and Ravichandra to Rs. 50,000/- each (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) under the provisions of Section 114(1) of the Customs Act, 1962. 3. Heard both the parties and perused the records. 4. Learned counsel for the appellants submits that the impugned order is not sustainable in law as the same has been passed without properly appreciating the facts and the evidence and the various decisions on the same issue. He further submitted that the appellants rendered their routine service of arranging for container and CHA service to earn for their livelihood within the bounds of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....out the smuggling and did not abet the smuggling. He further submitted that it is well settled that personal penalty can be imposed only for contumacious act for which there should exist evidence whereas in the present case appellant performed usual and routine function of his trade as transport agent and nothing more than that. Preponderance and suspicion entertained by the respondent will not take the seat of evidence. He further submitted that there is no evidence showing that the appellant Venugopal who acted as CHA was irresponsible in performing his functions as CHA. He also submitted that there was no occasion to suspect by the CHA because the seal on the container was found in tact which was also examined by the Customs Officer at N....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1992 (58) E.L.T. 276 (Tribunal) q. S. Anwarullah Vs. Collector of Customs, Madras - 1987 (27) E.L.T. 734 (Tribunal) r. R.M. Kothari & Co. Vs. CC (Import), Mumbai - 2002 (150) E.L.T. 378 (Tri.-Mumbai) s. Shafeek P.K. Vs. CC, Cochin - 2015 (325) E.L.T. 199 (Tri.-Bang.) 5. On the other hand the learned DR defended the impugned order and submitted that the act and conduct of the appellant in the whole transaction of export of illegal red sanders show that they are hand in glove with the exporter and had the knowledge of the illegal act of the exporter. He further submitted that the Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order has raised suspicion regarding the act and conduct of the appellants in the whole transact....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....for the exporter and appellant No. (2) Venugopal acted as a CHA for clearance of the goods at the NMPT, Mangalore and appellant No. (3) Ravichandra arranged the CHA and the container. Further, I find that the goods were stuffed at the KSDL factory, Bangalore in the presence of Mr. Hashim, Director of the exporter company and Superintendent of Central Excise and thereafter it was sent to Mangalore and from Mangalore it was exported. Subsequently, DRI got intelligence that the exported goods were falsely decalred as 'Mysore Detergent Cakes' by illegally concealing read sanders and thereafter the vessel containing the container was called back from Columbo and it was seized by the DRI. During the investigation DRI recorded the statement of Mr.....