TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 1654
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oms Act, 1962 vide Order-in-Original No.-KOL/CUS/PORT/ADC/GR-II/3-/2024 dated 28.03.2024. 1.1. Shri Srimanta Rakshit (hereinafter referred to as the 'appellant') has filed the instant appeal bearing No. C/75675/2025 challenging the Order-in-Appeal No. KOL/CUS (PORT)/ KS/ 573-574/2024 dated 0310-2024, passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeal), Custom House, Kolkata, whereby the learned appellate authority has upheld the order of the learned adjudicating authority imposing penalty upon the said appellant under Sections 112(a)(i) and 114AA of the Customs Act 1962. 1.2. As both the appeals have been filed against the same Order-in-Appeal, both are taken up together for decision by a common order. 2. Briefly stated facts of the case are that intelligence was received that M/s. Shree Laxmi Narayan Enterprises [Proprietor Shri Mahendra Singh] having address at 487/53, 54, 60, National Market, PeeraGarhi, Delhi - 110087 (hereafter referred to as 'importer') was importing goods decaled as New Mining Radial Tyre Size 1000R20-18 Doupro/Road Mining Use Only (OTR) under Bill of Entry No. 9064531 dated 11.06.2022 & Bill of Entry No, 8960103 dated 03.05.2022 through the Customs Brok....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....20,00,000/- under Section 112(a)(i) of the Customs Art. 1952 & Penalty of Rs 25,00,000/- under Section 114 AA of the Customs Act, 1962 on the CB M/s. Sri Durga Impex and Logistics. 2.6. On appeal, the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the penalties imposed and rejected the appeals filed by both the appellants. 2.7. Being aggrieved by the impugned Order, both the appellants have filed the instant appeals. 3. The appellant-CB, M/s. Sri Durga Impex and Logistics, has submitted that penalty has been imposed on them on the allegation that the Customs Broker has failed to discharge their duties as laid down under CBLR, 2018 in order to execute the conspiracy to smuggle the prohibited goods. It is their submission that such allegations of violation of the provisions of CBLR, 2018 by the Customs Broker has been dealt in a separate proceeding under the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations [CBLR], 2018 and hence, the impugned Show Cause Notice issued under Section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962 is legally not tenable. The appellant-CB pointed out that on the basis of the same set of facts, the Department had ordered for suspension of the Customs Broker license of the appellant-CB unde....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bmits that the appellant-CB firm and Shri Srimanta Rakshit, the G-Card holder of the CB firm, have not carried out the KYC verification of the importer properly. It is his case that the import documents and authorization were given to Shri Srimanta by one Sri Ajay Kumar Singh on behalf of the importer for taking up the clearance work which he received through email; that further investigation revealed that one Rajesh Kumar met with said Ajay Singh on behalf of the importer and entrusted the work to him for clearance of the consignments who in turn assigned the same to the said appellant herein namely, Shri Srimanta, being the employee of the CBfirm. Thus, he submits that the CB firm and their GCard holder, have not done the verification of the importer before filing the bills of entry. 4.1. Further, it is also the submission advanced by the Ld. Departmental Representative that Shri Srimanta Rakshit, in his statement, had admitted that he came to know about the mis-declaration in respect of the ongoing investigation against the Bill of Entry No 8960103 dated 03.06.2022 and the details of the ongoing investigation were then informed to the managing partner cum F-card holder of the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ncealed in the consignment of the goods imported. In this regard, we observe that there is a misdeclaration in the quantity of tyres declared in the Bills of entry. We find that in respect of the Bill of Entry No. 9064531 dated 11.06.2022, as against the declared quantity of 440 pcs of mining tyres, on examination, 3308 pcs tyres of miscellaneous international brands were found concealed in the inner layer of big size tyres which were suitable to be used in motor cars/bus/trucks. In respect of the consignment covered under Bill of Entry No 8960103 dated 03.06.2022, as against the declared quantity of 440 pcs of mining radial tyres, 3337 pcs tyres, of miscellaneous international brands were found concealed in the similar manner in two containers suitable to be used in motor cars/bus/trucks. Thus, we find that the misdeclaration and concealment of the tyres came to light only after 100% examination of the goods. 6.3. It is pertinent to observe that for imposition of penalty under the sections 112(a) and 114AA of the Customs Act, it must be established that the appellants have connived with the importer in the alleged offence of mis declaration of the imported goods. We do not find....