9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (1) TMI 1562X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uty liability be fastned on the CHA is well settle by the division bench of the Tribunal in the case of Devanshi Bhanji Khona [2008 (12) TMI 467 - CESTAT, BANGALORE], where it was held that the duties of the Custom House Agent i.e. current appellant before us, ended the moment the goods were cleared from the customs area. Subsequent detention of the undervaluation, etc. and could have proceeded against by the revenue only against the importer, which they did so, but not on the current appellant. As the demand of duty as also confiscation does not survive test of law against CHA, the question of imposition of penalty under Section 112 of the Custom Act, 1962 does not arise and is accordingly set aside. Appeal allowed - decided in favor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the adjudicating authority by the recording a finding as under. 10. I have gone through the impugned Order-in-Original and Grounds of Appeal for stay and other records of the case. I find that the impugned Order-in-Original envisages upon the appellant to pay the Customs Duty of ₹ 40,20815.00 under proviso to Section 147 read with Section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962 if the duty is not recovered from the persons and firms mentioned in Para B to F of the order and the Penalty has been imposed under Section 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962. The facts of the case reveal that the appellant had not fulfilled / discharged her obligation as CHA as per CHAR, 1984 No. 14(a) and others, as much as it was not ensured by her that all the d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... otherwise, handled documents without verifying the antecedents of the importers. I find there are no provisions in Customs Act, 1962, that demand of customs duty needs to be discharged by any other person than importers. It is on record that the appellant herein is not a importer but is a clearing house agent. The issue, as to, can a duty liability be fastned on the CHA is well settle by the division bench of the Tribunal in the case of Devanshi Bhanji Khona 2009 (237) E.L.T 509 (Tri. Bang.) wherein the bench held as under. 5.1 On perusal of the records, we find that the revenue has made efforts for recovery of the dues from the importer. We find that the Adjudicating Authority has set out the actions taken by the revenue for the reco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Rubber Works Ltd., (supra) and that of Tribunal judgment in the case of krison Electronic Systems Ltd. V. CC, Calcutta (supra). Both the judgments deal in great detail about the function of the CHA as an Agent and his responsibility is to a limited purpose of arranging release of the goods, and once the goods are cleared he has no further function. The reference to the Agent under Section 147 is to the Agent of the Principal i.e. Power of Attorney holder of the importer and where the relationship of Master and Servant come into play and in such cases the act of an agent is held to be an act of the Principal. While CHA is acting under a separate Regulations and his function under the licence is only to present papers for clearance of import ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
