2010 (4) TMI 1051 - HC - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Tribunal's error in penalizing Customs House Agent for incorrect declaration by exporter
2. Consideration of all material evidence by the Tribunal

Issue 1: Tribunal's error in penalizing Customs House Agent
The High Court admitted the appeal based on the substantial question of law regarding the Tribunal's decision on the obligation of a Customs House Agent (CHA) in ensuring the accuracy of the declaration made by the exporter in the shipping bill. The Court questioned whether the Tribunal erred in holding that a CHA can be penalized under the Customs Act, 1962 for any incorrect declaration by the exporter. The Court granted interim stay on the implementation of the Tribunal's order, directing the appellant to deposit 50% of the penalty amount with the Commissioner of Customs and furnish a bond for the balance amount. The Court specified that if the appeal succeeds, the deposited amount would be returned to the appellant with interest.

Issue 2: Consideration of all material evidence by the Tribunal
The High Court also raised the issue of whether the Tribunal should have considered all material evidence, including the statement of Mr. Bibhas Nandi, which was dated 7th June, 2003, and had a bearing on the case. The Court emphasized that the non-consideration of such crucial evidence could vitiate the Tribunal's order. Despite the representation of the respondents by their learned Counsel, the Court waived the service of notice of appeal on them. Additionally, the Court directed the appellant to file the requisite number of paper books within three months from the date of the order and allowed the supplementary affidavit filed in Court to be taken on record. Furthermore, the Court instructed that a photostat certified copy of the order would be supplied to the parties upon application, subject to compliance with formalities.

In conclusion, the High Court's judgment addressed the issues related to the Tribunal's decision on penalizing a Customs House Agent for incorrect declarations by exporters and the consideration of all material evidence in the case. The Court's detailed analysis and directions provided clarity on the legal aspects involved, ensuring a fair and thorough review of the matter.