9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 258X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... carrier. The description of goods in Bills of Lading also states; Shipper s Load and count xxx cartons , and particulars were furnished by Merchant - it is nobody s case that Petitioner knew what was contained in those containers and even if there is any allegation, which we could not find in the impugned order, there is no finding as to how Petitioner would have known what was there inside the sealed containers. The Custom House Agent, which the Petitioner was, only files the Bills of Entry on behalf of the importer relying on the documents provided to him by the importer, and if there is mis-match between what is mentioned in the documents given to the Customs House Agent to file Bills of Entry and what is found in the FCL container, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in this case was appointed as a Custom House Agent and indisputably has been paid a sum of Rs.10,000/- per container. There were seven containers involved that came as seven separate consignments and Petitioner had earned total amount of Rs. Seventy Thousand only. 4. Petitioner s role was that as Custom House Agent, admittedly he was approached by one Saleem Pistawala to file Bills of Entry in the custom on his behalf for the seven consignments. Petitioner was also handed over copies of documents required to be filed along with Bills of Entry including KYC documents of the importer. Based on those documents, Petitioner filed Bills of Entry. When the containers arrived and were opened, the containers allegedly contained goods materially d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eals were ever tampered with by anyone. Therefore the 7x40 ft. containers having arrived with intact seal (in fact it is quite clear that the containers were stuffed by the shipper or exporter at Huangpu Port, China) there is no question of Petitioner knowing what was stuffed in those containers. Moreover, it is nobody s case that Petitioner knew what was contained in those containers and even if there is any allegation, which we could not find in the impugned order, there is no finding as to how Petitioner would have known what was there inside the sealed containers. 7. Mr. Mishra submitted that in paragraph 2.13 of the impugned order it is recorded that Petitioner agreed that the goods were mis-declared grossly and many items were conc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e as well as Finance Ministry s stand was, Section 114AA has been proposed consequent to the detection of several cases of fraudulent exports. Mr.Balani, therefore, submitted that Section 114AA should be applicable only when there is an export consignment and not for import consignment. This issue we will consider at the hearing of the Petition. 11. Petition is admitted. Rule. 12. Interim order in terms of prayer clause (iv) is granted. Prayer clause (iv) reads thus :- (iv) That this Hon ble Court may grant interim/add interim relief directing the Respondents not to implement the Impugned Order dated 15.10.2019 pending final disposal of this writ petition. 13. Mr. Mishra waives service. 14. Should Respondents wish to file ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
