9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Allegations of post import violations against Customs House Agent (CHA) leading to heavy penalties, discrepancy between allegations in show cause notices and impugned orders, legality of penalties imposed on CHA.
Summary: 1. The appellant CHA was penalized under four impugned orders for alleged involvement in post import violations by importers, despite lack of evidence linking CHA to violations after customs clearance. Discrepancies were noted between allegations in show cause notices and impugned orders, which is impermissible as per legal precedents. 2. The impugned orders accused the CHA of conspiracy in duty-free clearance and disposal of goods, but no concrete evidence was presented to support these claims. The role of the CHA typically ends after customs clearance, and further investigation was necessary to establish CHA's involvement in post import violations. Despite heavy penalties, no action was taken to suspend or cancel CHA's license, indicating a lack of seriousness in the allegations. 3. The Tribunal found that the impugned orders exceeded the scope of the show cause notices and lacked sufficient evidence to implicate the CHA in post import violations. Due to the discrepancies and lack of conclusive proof, the penalties imposed on the CHA were set aside, granting the CHA the benefit of doubt in all four appeals.
|
