9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (6) TMI 357X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [Order]. Heard both sides. This is a case where the impugned goods were declared as Air Conditioners and parts thereof, and the same were cleared after physical examination by the Customs Authorities against five bills of entry but contained in one container. Nearly after two months the container was delivered to the importer, the case was detected initially by the police and subsequently ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ice as to how Shri Jha in his personal capacity had abetted in the misdeclaration and wrong clearance of misdeclared goods. 2. Shri D.K. Saha, learned Consultant appearing for the appellants states that neither in the show cause notice nor in the adjudication order, any material has been brought on record that the appellants had any knowledge of the actual cargo contained in the consignment or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ttle precaution in handling the said cargo they would not have landed into this situation of having been a noticee to the instant show cause notice. The contention of the CHA that only 10% of the consignment was examined and he was not sure regarding the contents of the balance 90% of the consignment is an over simplification of his role as a CHA. The container contained five LCL consignments. It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4. I find that the findings of the Commissioner do not conclusively prove the role of the CHA in the wrong clearance of the misdeclared cargo. There is also no allegation that the CHA in any way influenced the Customs Authorities to examine only particular packages. The observations of the Commissioner that the CHA should have been more careful cannot be a basis for penalising the CHA in the abs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
