9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 594X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shri Saju Parumal, Director of CHA and Shri Ismail Osman Jat, who is an employee, respectively. All these appeals were filed against the imposition of penalty under Section 114 of the Customs Act by the Adjudicating Authority as well as the First Appellate Authority. 3. The relevant facts arises for consideration are that one M/s. Haryana Trading Co. was engaged in the business of export of rice and had filed a Shipping Bill dated 12-3-2010 with Custom House, through CHA M/s. Trinity Shipping & Allied Services for export of raw Basmati rice in packing of 19 Kgs. Declaring the F.O.B. value as Rs. 10,34,474/-. During inspection, it was noticed that the quality of rice was not as has been shown in the export documents and the said quantity of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A/1739-1740/WZB/AHD/2010, the Division Bench has set aside the penalties imposed on the CHA and the Executive of the CHA. It is also his submission that the offending goods were detained by the authorities on 15-3-2010 while show-cause notice was issued on 20th September, 2010 which is beyond the period of limitation as indicated in the provisions of Customs Act, 1962. For the proposition, he would rely upon the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh in the case of Vilayat Hussain [1997 (95) E.L.T. 19 (M.P.)]. It is his submission that the said case was carried in by the Revenue and it was dismissed by the Apex Court as reported in 1999 (108) E.L.T. A59 (S.C.). He would rely upon the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Andhr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rice. Shri Saju Perumal was earlier Director of the export firm. In my view, this link cannot be held against the CHA firm which was only filing the documents by exporter to the departmental authorities. Nowhere it is mentioned that the two employees were aware of the export of non-basmati rice under the guise of basmati rice. The case here is that the CHA followed the instructions for filing the documents. There is nothing on the record showing that both the employees and CHA firm were aware of the export of non-basmati rice. Penalties imposed on these three appellants seem to be presumption and assumption in the eyes of law. In its final order dated 11-10-2010, in the case of Anchor Logistics, this Tribunal had considered an identical iss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
