9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Disproportionate penalty imposed on the courier service provider u/s Customs duty and connivance of the courier with the importer.
The judgment addresses the issue of disproportionate penalty imposed on the courier service provider. The appellant argued that the penalty of &8377; 20 lakhs on the courier was arbitrary and disproportionate, considering the Customs duty imposed on the goods and the penalty on the importer. The order acknowledged that there was no connivance of the appellant with the importer or exporter. The appellant contended that the courier only carried out the instructions given by the importer. The Tribunal found that the courier had a significant role defined by law in ensuring the proper declaration of goods' description and value. The courier is intimately connected with the import process from packing to delivery and is obligated under law to be aware of the contents and implications under Indian law. Despite the appellant facing a substantial penalty, the Tribunal held that the courier cannot be absolved of its duty and responsibility for misdeclaration. The penalty was reduced from &8377; 20 lakhs to &8377; 5 lakhs to prevent recurrence and bring the litigation to an end. The judgment also deals with the issue of connivance of the courier with the importer. The appellant argued that there was no connivance between them and that the courier simply followed the importer's instructions. The Tribunal considered the courier's duty to disclose the value properly, as couriers are governed by laws defining their responsibilities. The Tribunal noted that the suppression of export value was within the courier's knowledge. Despite the lack of connivance between the appellant and the importer, the Tribunal held that the courier cannot evade responsibility for misdeclaration. The penalty on the courier was reduced to &8377; 5 lakhs from the initial &8377; 20 lakhs, emphasizing the courier's obligation to comply with the law and prevent future violations. Separate Judgment: No separate judgment was delivered by the judges in this case.
|
