2018 (5) TMI 1068

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ner (AR) for the respondent ORDER This appeal is directed against Order-in-Original No: MUM-CUS/VBS/II/APSC/03 /2017-18 dated 05/10/2017 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (II), ACC, Mumbai. 2. Heard both the sides and perused the records. 3. On perusal of records it transpires that the appeal preferred by the appellant is against the imposition of penalties on them under the provisions of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... company, was issued a show cause notice for imposition of penalties on the allegation that they failed to exercise due diligence to ascertain independently as required under Courier Imports and Exports (Clearance) Regulations, 1998, the correctness and completeness of information submitted to proper officer. The appellant contested the show cause notice on merits defending that penalty cannot be .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... dings which the adjudicating authority relies for imposing penalty, is that the appellant failed to cross-check the declared value, importer's name, IEC and identity of the person who had submitted the documents for the purpose of filing of courier bill of entry. In my considered view this omission of the appellant, at the most, may attract the provisions of Courier Imports and Exports (Cleara .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X