9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (11) TMI 88X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Balagopal, for the Appellant. Shri P. Chandrasekaran, SCGSC, for the Respondent. [Judgment per : A.K. Ganguly, C.J. ]. - This writ appeal has been filed by the writ petitioner M/s. Kwick Handling Service Pvt. Ltd. presently known as M/s. Sikkas Kwick Handling Service (P) Ltd. functioning as a licensed Custom House Agent (CHA). 2. The relevant facts of the case appear from the judgment of the writ Court. It appears that the CHA admitted two cardboard boxes containing the personal effects as unaccompanied baggage of one Ms. Birgitte Arnak Pedersen at Chennai Port for export to Denmark. The said passenger has a Danish Passport and the said consignment along with the Shipping Bill No.0625691 dated 03.02.2004 were examined in the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... posed on it for having filed the shipping bill by misdeclaring the antique as Plastic Buddha idol in the shipping bill concealed among the personal effects and why penal action under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962 should not be initiated against the CHA. 5. Thereafter, an order in Original Petition was passed by the Joint Commissioner of Customs (Adjudication Unit-Sea) over the aforesaid show cause proceedings, and in the said order, the relevant facts were noted. It was held that a personal hearing was given to one Mr. R. Ramachandran, Branch Manager and authorized signatory of CHA, who appeared for personal hearing on 30.12.2004 and submitted his written submissions. In the said written submissions, it was stated that the CHA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ocuments for export and proper packing. So, it cannot be denied that persons doing packing on behalf of CHA were not aware of the contents in the package and presented the goods to the customs as was given by the passenger. It was also found that this is not a case of normal trade export, but is an export against the unaccompanied baggage of a passenger, and entire documentation was made by the CHA and then signed by the passenger. Therefore, while preparing the documents, the appellant must have noticed the items and should have guided the passenger as well as the department. Instead of doing so, the appellant declared the Buddha idol as plastic goods and did not mention the other items, namely, metal bells and metal ornaments, in the expo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... igations cast under the said Regulations, the appellant is liable. We are of the view that under 13(d) of the said Regulation, the appellant is liable to advise his client properly to comply with the provisions of the Act and in case of non-compliance, bring the matter to the notice of the Deputy Commissioner of Customs or Assistant Commissioner of Customs as the case may be. The relevant clause 13(d) is set out below: - "advise his client to comply with the provisions of the Act and in case of non-compliance, shall bring the matter to the notice of the Deputy Commissioner of Customs or Assistant Commissioner of Customs" 10. In our considered view, the appellant has failed to discharge his duty in terms of clause 13(d) of the Regul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
