TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (5) TMI 2142
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ef facts of the case are that on specific intelligence that red sanders whose export is prohibited was attempted to be exported through Tuticorin Sea Port, officers of DRI, Regional Unit, Tuticorin intercepted a truck along with a container mounted on it. The cargo was covered by Shipping Bill No. 4765838 dated 2.4.2013 filed in the name of S.K. Enterprises, Tirupur. As per the export documents, the container was said to have contained 1000 bags of dehusked coconut and was declared to have been stuffed at the factory premises of S.K. Enterprises, Kanyakumari. As per the stuffing report, this container was sealed with Central Excise 'One-Time-Seal' and the liner seal and the stuffing report was purported to have been certified by one Shri A.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... 117 of the CA 1962 on the appellant, leading to this appeal. 3. Dr. S. Krishnanandh, Ld. Counsel appeared for the appellant and Shri N. Satyanarayanan, Ld. Authorized Representative appeared for the respondent. 3.1 The Ld. Counsel Dr. S. Krishnanandh appearing for the appellant submitted that the allegation against the appellant in the Show Cause Notice is that he neither verified the credentials of the exporter nor got the authorization from them to do so. However, he filed shipping bill No. 4765838 dated 02.04.2013 in the name of M/s. S.K. Enterprises as directed by Shri. Marther @ Sivakumar and Shri. C. Ravi @ Kumar, which resulted in the illegal attempted export of red sanders, a prohibited item for export. The Ld. Counsel submi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed Regulation 11(a) and 11(o) of the Custom House Agent Licensing Regulation, 2004 (CHALR 2004), read with section 151 of the CA 1962 to impose penalties under section 114 and section 117 of the CA 1962. He stated that the CHALR 2004 is a self-contained Regulation and for any infraction or violation of which, the action that may be taken is prescribed in the Regulations itself. Violation of the CHALR 2004 cannot be extrapolated to be deemed as a violation of the CA 1962 so as to enable the Lower Authority to impose penalties under the CA 1962. The Ld. Counsel submitted that the Lower Authority has hence committed a grave error which goes to the root of the matter, meriting rejection of the impugned order. 3.2 The Ld. AR took us through t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... case. He stated that he had exported consignments even before this and for the first consignment for which he got order through Amal Raj, he was paid Ra. 29,071/- as fee in cash. For the second, third, fourth, and fifth consignments, he was paid Rs. 45,642/- Rs. 32,288 Rs. 35,039/- and Rs.45,642/- respectively as fee into his bank account. Export consignments involve far less processing and hence command far less fees for Custom House Agents. Export consignments which are factory stuffed are still easier to process because only paper work has to be completed and there is no examination. The typical charges for such consignments in Tuticorin do not exceed a couple of thousand rupees. This CHA has charged about 20 times the average charges. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as penal provisions for its violation. 4.2 I had an occasion to examine a similar matter in the case of M/s. Classic Shipping & Co. Vs. Commissioner of Customs - Final Order No. 41233/2024, Dated: 23.09.2024. Relevant portion of the said order is extracted below; "4. . . . Fourthly when action is proposed to be initiated against Custom Brokers for lapses on their part for their duties to be performed as a Customs Broker and not for any other blame worthy act under the Customs Act 1962, then the matter should be examined under the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018 (CBLR, 2018) which regulates the working of Customs Brokers and contains provisions for action to be initiated against them for lapses on their part." 4.3 ....