9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 753X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... verify the antecedents of the importer - HELD THAT:- There is nothing brought out from the records that the appellant had in any manner abetted the importer or the import of impugned goods. In para 53 it is clearly stated that the appellant has only assisted to file the documents on behalf of importer as required of a CHA Firm. It is not done in his individual capacity. There is no allegation tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le phones are being imported by mis-declaring the goods as branded items, the consignments covered under bill of entry dated 6/11//2012 consisting of 160 packages were taken up for examination at the Air Cargo complex Meenambakkam, Chennai on 12/11/2012. On verification of the documents, it was seen that the consignment was declared to contain 116 packages consisting of 6475 pieces of China mobile ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tery and 4 bundles of stickers bearing the name Samsung . It appeared that there is IPR violation in respect of the goods imported. Investigation was conducted and statements were recorded. Show Cause Notice were issued to various persons including the importer and the appellant herein. After due process of law, the original authority imposed a penalty of Rs. 50,000/- on the appellant herein. Ag ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... k the antecedents of the importer as required under Regulation 13 of CHALR, 2004. It is pointed out that for such violation, the proceedings under CHALR, 2004 ought to have been initiated by the department. When there is no evidence that appellant has involved in the act of illegal import the penalty under Section 11 2 (a) ought not to have been imposed. Ld. counsel prayed that appeal may be allow ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lping the import of the illegal goods. For this reason, we find that the department has not been able to establish sufficient grounds for imposing penalty under section 112 (a) of Customs Act 1962. The penalty imposed is not warranted and not justified. 6. In the result, the impugned order is modified to the extend of setting aside the penalty of Rs. 50,000/- imposed on the appellant herein. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
