TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (4) TMI 1363
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ough concerning two separate show cause notices and adjudication/appellate orders passed in the matter, involve a common question of law and are against the same appellant and hence are taken up for decision by way of a common order. 3. The facts of the case are that the appellant was issued two show cause notices bearing Nos.S-2422020 SIIB (Port) dated 25.11.2020 and S-243/2020/SIIB(Port) dated 25.11.2020 charging him with alleged fraudulent export carried out by one M/s. Asian Enterprises vide Shipping Bill dated 11.06.2019 and M/s. Sai Trading vide Shipping Bills dated 10.06.2019 and 12.06.2019. The two show cause notices assert that the aforesaid exporting firms were key players who along with the present appellant „connived to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s case that levy of penalty upon them as aforestated is arbitrary and uncalled for. It is vehemently submitted before us by the Ld.Counsel that none of the persons who handled the said consignments were the employees of the appellant firm at the material time and that there has been no connection of the appellant or his firm with that of Shri Becharam Das, Partner of M/s. Advent Shipping Agency, the Customs Broker on record, for each of those two shipments. The Ld.Counsel therefore seeks complete exoneration from the proceedings initiated by the department against them in the matter. 6. The ld.AR for the Revenue however reiterates the findings of the lower authority and submits that the key conspirator in the said matter is one Sri Ramkr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nder law. It indeed, is a fact that any misdeclaration in terms of valuation of goods is done by the exporter, may or may not be with the connivance of the Customs Broker associated with the matter. The appellant nowhere being in picture either by way of being an exporter themselves or the Customs Broker in the impugned shipment cannot be faulted upon, for not being a party to the mis-adventure. There is nothing on record to show that the appellant acted maliciously with intent to cause financial losses to the exchequer. The nexus, if any, between the aforesaid two exporters/their Customs Broker in the matter and the appellant is required to be proven and established by way of concrete proof in order to subject him to penal liabilities. Thi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ugned orders are extracted below : Customs Appeal No.75256 of 2023 "62. I find from the investigation conducted so far, that gross misdeclaration in terms of valuation has been done by the exporter, M/s. Asian Enterprises with the connivance of Customs Broker, M/s. Advent Shipping Agency for the purpose of availing IGST refund fraudulently, thus causing loss to exchequer. The goods were seized on 18.12.2019 under section 110(1) of the Customs Act, 1962 under proper seizure/detention memo. Hence, the goods are liable for confiscation under section 113(i) of the Customs Act, 1962 and rendering the Exporter and Customs Broker liable for penal action under section 114(iii) & 114AA of the Act, ibid." Customs Appeal No.75279 of 202....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bove, that Sri Ramkrishna Kole joined M/s. Advent Shipping Agency to facilitate the export and to become an authorized signatory of the CB firm for clearance of the cargo and as soon as the consignments were cleared he again rejoined his former employer M/s. SSS Sai Forwards. From the above discussion it transpires that Sri Kousik Nandy of M/s. SSS Sai Forwarders was actively involved in the subject export and its clearance. I also find that Sri Nandy is trying to seek refuge by placing the responsibility on his employees and denying having any knowledge that his company served as the contact between the exporter and the Customs Broker M/s. Advent Shipping Agency. Moreover, the statement of Sri Kousik Nandy, the documents recovered during t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Sri Nandy is trying to seek refuge by placing the responsibility on his employees and denying having any knowledge that his company served as the contact between the exporter and the Customs Broker M/s. Advent Shipping Agency. Moreover, the statement of Sri Kousik Nandy, the documents recovered during the search of his office premises and the recorded statements of the employees of M/s.SSS Sai Forwarders appears to be indicating towards his collusion with fraudulent exports and its clearance, which rendering Sri Kousik Nandy of M/s. SSS Sai Forwarders liable for penal action under Section 114 (iii) & 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962." liable for penal action under section 114(iii) & 114AA of the Act, ibid." 11. However, this assertion has....