9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 1254X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... No such evidence is brought out in the present case. Whatever allegation could be inferred is against violation of CHALR, 2004 and lack of due diligence by the CHA. Such alleged lack of due diligence has been fastened on the appellant as a CHA - such allegation is not legally sustainable. His role as an abettor of improper act or omission has not been evidenced. Penalty set aside - appeal al ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellant. He also ordered ICD, TKD to examine and investigate the role of CHA, M/s.S.J. International in the present case. 2. Ld. Counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is only a paid employee of CHA. He was acting as a Manager and was processing the documents for the CHA firm. However, being a paid employee, he was not involved in mis- declaration that would have been attempted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or omission would render such goods liable to confiscation under section 113, or abets the doing or omission of such an act, shall be liable,- (i) in the case of goods in respect of which any prohibition is in force under this Act or any other law for the time being in force, to a penalty 1[2[not exceeding three times the value of the goods as declared by the exporter or the value as determine ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CHALR/provisions of Customs Act on the part of the CHA, who dealt with many such consignments. However, surprisingly, only the appellant, which is an employee of the CHA has been proceeded and penalized by ₹ 5 lakh of penalty. We have also examined the findings recorded at para-22 of the impugned order. The Original Authority found that from the facts of the case, it is clear that the appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ught under the category of abettor only. For such allegation, positive evidence of act with knowledge has to be ascertained in the present case. No such evidence is brought out in the present case. In fact, whatever allegation could be inferred is against violation of CHALR, 2004 and lack of due diligence by the CHA. Such alleged lack of due diligence has been fastened on the appellant as a CHA. W ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
