TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2005 (10) TMI 143
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nalty of Rs. 1,50,000/- imposed on the appellant under Section 114 of the Customs Act. 3. The appellant is a CHA (Custom House Agent). The brief facts of the case are that on 7-6-2002 one shipping bill was filed for export of the goods declared the same as ready-made garments declaring the value of Rs. 1,19,83,429/-. On examination, goods were found to be of inferior quality and market enquiry, i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....jan Arora proprietor of M/s. P.K.M. Enterprises at the time of examination by the Customs officers, it was found that the goods were inferior quality and also there was shortage in quantity. The appellant immediately informed Shri Rajan Arora on whose instructions the shipping bills were filed and Shri Rajan Arora instructed to convert the shipping bill to non-drawback. On his instructions, the ap....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rter to misdeclare the goods. The appellant is only a CHA and filed shipping bill as per the instructions of the exporter on the asking of Customs authorities the appellant immediately disclosed the name and address of the exporter and Shri Rajan Arora was also found available on the given address and thorough investigation was made by the Customs authorities. In these circumstances, the contentio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e. 6. In the present case, the adjudicating authority held that the appellant is a party to conspiracy with the exporter to get higher amount of drawback. The shipping bill was filed in the name of M/s. United Exports and all the documents were handed over by Shri Rajan Arora to the appellant who is also proprietor of another firm M/s. P.K.M. Enterprises. The present appellant was present at the ....