9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (1) TMI 332X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted to export the goods in question without a valid APEDA Certificate. In this connection Shri A.K. Jayaraj, learned Counsel pointed out that at the time when the assessment is made the APEDA Certificate should be produced and after looking into the APEDA Certificate assessment will be over and the Let export order was given in this case. He therefore, pointed out that there was a valid certificate in question. With respect to the finding that the partner had admitted in his statement that APEDA Certificate expired on 25-6-1996, the learned Counsel stated that this statement given by him was retracted. He pointed out that this statement cannot be relied upon. It was his contention that there was enquiry report under the Customs House Agen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the original APEDA Certificate will not be with the department in view of the statement made by the appellants in the reply furnished by them. He also pointed out that in the reply they have stated that they will produce the same at the time of shipment as per the customs procedure. He in this connection drew my attention to the statement given by the appellants wherein it is stated that APEDA certificate expired on 25-6-1996. He, therefore, pointed out that when the certificate itself was misplaced by the exporters as per the statement of the appellant in the reply to the show cause notice, the charge against the appellants is proved. He further pointed out there is nothing in the record to show that the appellants had given the statement ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... matter before, the Customs Authorities. We have not done anything intentionally, as stated by the exporters and as alleged in the Show Cause Notice. We admit that we have not obtained the certificate and produced at the time of shipment as required under the Customs procedures. We assure that such mistakes will not be repeated by us in future. We request that a lenient view may be taken and pass orders and oblige. We request the Personal Hearing to explain our stand. A perusal of this goes to show that the appellant has not challenged about the veracity of the statement given before the customs officers. He has also not mentioned anything about the non supply of the documents. When the appellant has not put forward these pleas be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... matter, I hold that imposition of penalty on the Customs House Agent is sustainable. 5. At this juncture the learned Counsel pointed out that the Exporter himself was originally penalised Rs. one lakh but the appellant was penalised Rs. 2 lakhs which was finally reduced to Rs. one lakh. He, therefore, pointed out that when the exporter himself was originally penalised Rs. one lakh penalty of Rs. 1 lakh on the CHA is excessive. Therefore, imposition of penalty on the CHA is not proper. It was also submitted by the learned Counsel that separate penalty on the Manager Esakiadumperumal is not warranted in this case. But the learned SDR stated that in view of Section 147(3) of the Customs Act, 1962 any person who has acted on behalf of the exp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
