9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (3) TMI 68X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lies in taking action under CHALR and not under the Customs Act. Therefore, I find no reason to interfere with the impugned order. - Decided against Revenue. - Appeal No. C/893/11 - - - Dated:- 2-1-2015 - P. R. Chandrasekharan,JJ. For the Appellant : Shri A K Singh, Addl. Comm. (AR) For the Respondent : None ORDER Per: P R Chandrasekharan: 1. The appeal has been filed by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on under Section 111(d) and the goods were allowed redemption on payment of fine of ₹ 1.00 lakh and a penalty of ₹ 25,000/- on the importer. A penalty of ₹ 25,000/- was imposed on the CHA also under Section 112(a). Inasmuch as the bill of entry was filed by the CHA without having any IEC code thereby contravening the provisions of Regulations 13 of the CHALR 2004. In appeal befor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s: The adjudicating authority has found (vide paragraphs # 3.3 3.4 of the impugned order) that the appellants had violated the Courier Regulation # 13 and the CHA Regulation # 13, respectively. However, for violation of these regulations, they cannot be penalised under Section 112(a) (this section being dependent the goods being held liable to confiscation under Section 111). Possibility of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
