9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (10) TMI 576X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... application is to dispense with the condition of pre-deposit of penalty of ₹ 2 lakhs imposed upon the applicant who is a CHA in terms of provisions of 112 and 114A. For better appreciation of reasoning adopted by Commissioner for imposition of penalty, we reproduce para 5.12 of the impugned order. I find that there is allegation against him that he collaborated with the party in the all ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, has stated that the B/E was filed by their authorised CHA. It is an established and admitted fact that there was gross undervaluation in respect of the goods declared in the invoice. I feel that in the capacity of CHA, he is likely to possess knowledge of approximate prevailing prices of common goods imported into India. I also find that the undervaluation of declared items was 3 to 4 times as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ds and acted in negligent manner in respect of preparing and filing the B/E. I thus find that his this negligence supported the importers to attempt the clearance of imported goods under gross mis-declaration of description, quantity and value of goods. Even if this version is accepted that he filed the bill of entry on the basis of invoice given to him, he cannot escape from the responsibility of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e been proposed in the SCN against the firm as well as on Shri Tarun Datta, the proprietor of the firm. In this regard I find that it is a settled law that the proprietor and the firm are single identity and separate penalties are not imposable upon them. 2. As is seen from the above, there is no positive evidence attributable to the applicant indicating that he was in the knowledge of mis-dec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t wherein in the present case import is involved, cannot be held to be justifiable. We, accordingly, are of the view that in the absence of any direct evidence reflecting upon the knowledge on the part of CHA and his active participation in the misdeclaration of the value of the goods, he, at this prima facie stage, cannot be held liable to penalty. We accordingly, dispense with the requirement of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
