TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (4) TMI 731
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gh Pal, Ld. Assistant Commissioner defended the impugned order. 3. I have considered the rival contentions, have carefully perused the documents placed on record and also gone through the judicial precedents relied upon during the course of arguments. The only issue that arises for my consideration is, "whether the revenue is justified in imposing penalty under CBLR 18 (1) of CBLR 2018 on the appellant?" 4. The facts are not in dispute, the exporter was alleged to have availed undue benefit under Merchandise Exports from India Scheme (MEIS) in the export of safety matches by misclassifying the same under CTH 36050090 as against CTH 36050010, by which the exporter had availed benefit by way of reward of 7% MEIS ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tra, Shri Harendra Singh Pal, Ld. Assistant Commissioner having relied on the findings of the Original Authority, has also relied on an order of Chennai Bench in the case of M/s. Seaswan Shipping and Logistics, Tuticorin Vs. The Commissioner of Customs, Tuticorin vide Final Order No.40008/2024 dated 03.01.2024. 7. I have gone through both the orders relied upon by the rival parties; in the case of M/s. Seaswan Shipping and Logistics, the issue relates to the penalty under Section 114 of the Customs Act and hence, the ratio of said order is not squarely applicable to the facts of this case although the penalty under Section 114 has been upheld on the customs broker for alleged violations therein. In the case of M/s. Max Miller Agenc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... was nothing wrong in the classification of the impugned goods. Further, I find that learned Commissioner in the impugned order has not followed Advisory No.1/2002 dt. 29.12.2002 issued by the Chief Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai advising the Customs officers not to issue show cause notice to Customs Brokers for violation of CBLR, 2018 in cases involving interpretative disputes regarding classification, availment of benefits of exemption notification and valuation. 8. I also find that the Commissioner in the impugned order has held that the appellants are not directly benefited by their contravention hence there is no mens rea on the part of the appellant and therefore the imposition of penalty on the appellant for violation of Re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of this Tribunal in the case of S. Narendra Kumar & Co. v. CCE, Mumbai-II - 2003 (156) E.L.T. 1001 wherein the Tribunal held that no penalty is imposable for filing incorrect classification. The learned Counsel has also referred to many other decisions to the same effect. A classification declaration indicates the classification, which the assessee proposes to adopt. He may be in error. Revenue authorities are at liberty to consider the proposed classification and to order payment of duty according to the changed correct classification. That is the whole purpose of requiring an assessee to file a classification declaration. In proposing an erroneous classification, the assessee commits no offence, justifying imposition of penalty. This is ....