TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (3) TMI 1090
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....L/CUS/PORT/KS/37/2024 dated 10.06.2024 wherein the penalty imposed on the appellant under Section 114(iii) of the Customs Act, 1962 vide the Order-in-Original No. KOL/CUS/ADC/PORT/EXPORT/92/2023 dated 02.08.2023 has been upheld. 2. The facts of the case are that M/s. Ehasanmann Trading Concern has exported readymade garments under four (04) Shipping Bills bearing Nos. 2544644, 2544647, 2544816 and 2546144 all dated 30.11.2015 through their authorized Customs Broker i.e., the appellant herein. On examination of the said consignments, the Officers of the SIB (Port) observed that one item in each Shipping Bill might have been overvalued. Thereafter, it was found that the total declared FOB of the goods in all the four Shipping Bills was Rs.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ponsible for the over valuation of export goods. Accordingly, the appellant argued that the penalty imposed on them in this case is legally not sustainable and thus prayed for setting aside the same. 4. The Ld. Authorized Representative of the Revenue appearing before us has reiterated the findings in the impugned order. He thus justified the imposition of penalty on the appellant. 5. Heard both sides and perused the records of the case. 6. In the present case, we find that the appellant, a Customs Broker, has filed four Shipping Bills on behalf of the exporter, namely, M/s. Ehasanmann Trading Concern. On examination of the goods declared for export in the said four shipping bills, the description and quantity of the goods were fou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion of the Customs Broker (appellant herein) for the alleged overvaluation of the goods is not sustainable. Consequently, we find that the allegation against the appellant, that they have facilitated the over-invoicing of the goods for availment of excess drawback by the exporter is unsubstantiated. 7.1. In this regard, we find that an identical issue came up for consideration before the Tribunal at Delhi in the case of World Cargo Movers v. Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi [2002 (139) E.L.T. 408 (Tri. - Del.)] wherein, under similar facts and circumstances, the penalty imposed on the CHA under Section 114 ibid. was set aside. The relevant portion of the said Order is reproduced below: - "6. I have examined the submissions. I....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tice to the appellant. All those statements have been referred to in the impugned order, as well. However, none of the statements contains anything incriminating against the present appellant. The statements, insofar as they relate to the present appellant, are only to the effect that the exporter had filed the export documents through the appellant. The exporter has never stated that the value of the goods or any other material particulars relating to the goods were entered in the documents by the CHA contrary to his instructions or advice. A CHA can act only in accordance with the instructions of the importer/exporter. Of course, he has to ensure that all the particulars so entered in the export documents are true and correct with referen....