TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (1) TMI 1740
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ave heard Ms. Tapasya Agarwal, Advocate for the Appellants and Shri R.K. Mishra, DR for the Respondent. 3. Ld. Counsel submitted that their conduct, in relation to the imports, was looked into by the enquiry authority who, vide its report dated 26.12.2014, had exonerated the appellant against violation of Regulation 13 (d), (f) and (b) of the CHALR 2014. The Ld. Commissioner in the impugned, however order held that the appellant has contravened Regulation 13(d) which puts the onus on the CHA to advice the importer regarding the compliance of the provisions of the Customs Act. He has referred to the statement of Shri Shihabuddeen, Manager of the appellant, dated 11.06.2012 in which he has admitted over sight on their part in not noticing th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....'s end. In the case laws relied upon by the appellant the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of M.D. Shipping Agency, (Supra) in similar circumstances, has held as follows: "We find that the impugned order has observed that once the goods have been cleared out of customs charge and handed over by the CHA to his client, obligation of the CHA to CHALR comes to an end. It is not the obligation of the CHA to assume that post the clearance of imported goods it would not be taken to the address given in the advance license. Moreover, in this particular case, imported zinc ingot had on clearance from the customs department taken to the office of the transporter. In these circumstances, there could be no occasion for the CHA to suspect that....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....under Regulation 13(d), we find that no discrepancy was found by the authorities in the documents filed by the appellant therefore question of advice does not arise and description shown in the bill of entry matches with the documents like invoice, packing list, when there is no discrepancy then it is not required for the appellant to bring it to the customs authorities. Further, in this case, only at the time of examination it was found that some fire works apart from the goods in the bill of entry which is not proved by the authorities was in the knowledge of the appellant. Therefore, in the absence of any evidence on record that appellant was having knowledge of misdeclaration, charge under Regulation 13(d) also stands not providas held ....