9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (7) TMI 1119X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in law, the fact of filing the Bill of Entry on the basis of unsigned invoices and such other considerations as brought out in the investigations, the fact that digital mapping and cyber forensic examination and imaging of the appellant s hard disks and CPUs and laptops seized from their office revealed explosive documentary evidence exposing the entire racket, no case for completely setting aside the penal liabilities imposed is made out by the appellants. The ends of justice shall be met by imposing penalty of Rs.4.00 Lakh on M/s.Prethvisha Logistics Pvt.Ltd. and Rs.1.00 Lakh on Shri Palash Banerjee under Section 112(ii) of the Customs Act - appeal disposed off. - HON BLE SHRI R. MURALIDHAR , MEMBER ( JUDICIAL ) And HON BLE SHRI RAJEEV TANDON , MEMBER ( TECHNICAL ) Shri K.K.Sanyal, Consultant for the Appellant Shri Tariq Suliaman, Authorized Representative for the Revenue ORDER Per : RAJEEV TANDON : M/s. Prethvisha Logistics Pvt.Ltd. and Shri Palash Banerjee had filed the impugned appeals assailing the Order-in-Original No.KOL/CUS/COMMISSIONER/PORT/40/2018 dated 27.04.2018 issued on 13.05.2018, being aggrieved by the imposition of penalty of Rs.20.00 Lakh each imposed on them u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation under section 111, or abets the doing or omission of such an act, or (b) who acquires possession of or is in any way concerned in carrying, removing, depositing, harbouring, keeping, concealing, selling or purchasing, or in any other manner dealing with any goods which he knows or has reason to believe are liable to confiscation under section 111, 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 [not exceeding the value of the goods or five thousand rupees], whichever is the greater; [(ii) in the case of dutiable goods, other than prohibited goods, subject to the provisions of section 114A, to a penalty not exceeding ten per cent. of the duty sought to be evaded or five thousand rupees, whichever is higher : Provided that where such duty as determined under sub-section (8) of section 28 and the interest payable thereon under section 28AA is paid within thirty days from the date of communication of the order of the proper officer determining such duty, the amount of penalty liable to be paid by such person under this section shall be twenty-five per cent. of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt where an enquiry against such agent is pending or contemplated. 6. The following table hereinbelow indicates the variance between the declared and determined value of the import cargo. The appellants have not challenged the value as determined by the Proper Officer under Section 14 of the Customs Act read with the provisions of the Customs Valuation Rules : Sl No B/E No. Date Declared value(Rs) Admitted duty(Rs) Determined value(Rs) Total Duty(Rs) Diff. in Duty Confirmed(Rs) 1 2128503 14.05.2013 4,33,663 1,20,289 95,20,402 27,07,602 25,87,313 2 2097821 10.05.2013 3,89,669 1,10,747 77,44,394 22,02,506 20,91,759 3 2806407 25.7.2013 25,91,991 7,37,162 74,14,650 21,08,727 13,71,565 4 2923787 6.8.2013 31,71,912 9,16,954 95,86,169 27,26,306 18,09,352 5 2922947 6.8.2013 27,65,256 7,99,778 77,28,058 21,97,860 13,98,082 6 2125264 14.5.2013 7,79,336 2,24,788 28,69,510 8,16,089 5,94,493 7 2814129 25.7.2013 9,48,447 2,74,561 31,61,280 9,19,685 6,45,124 Grand Total : 1,10,80,274 31,84,279 4,80,24,463 1,36,78,775 1,04,97,688 7. As noted from case records, each of the said import shipments comprised of various consumer dutiable goods of a wide variety such as plastic showpieces, cutlery set, p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s could be read out and taken from hard-discs revealed at least, in 9 cases excel sheet under heading packing list containing values of different mixed items and other particulars under column heading of description, item no., Pcs/Ctn, qty, price, amnt, t. amnt, CBM, shop No., Ph. No., Payment terms, S/M, carton no. pertaining to some of the previous imports made by the said importer, handled by the appellants as a Customs Broker. However, one such excel sheet maintained for goods imported vide container No.KKFU 7279459 (Bill of Entry No. 551289 dated 13.07.2010) was also retrieved. In the said excel sheet, number of the container is mentioned; date of loading is given as June 10 , and the value of the goods has been mentioned as 376616 RMB equivalent to Rs.26,36,312/- (approx.). Upon verification it was found out that the said goods imported vide above referred Bill of Entry by the importer M/s. Aakash Exports, through the appellants, were supplied by M/s. Nero Overseas, China and declared as US Dollar 6128.72 i.e. to say the goods were assessed for Rs.4,34,058/- against the actual value of the goods being Rs.26,36,312/- (approx.) as aforesaid. Likewise similar stories were repeat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ls of Lading and invoice for the containers for which no Bill of Entry was filed. They submitted improper documents such as unsigned Invoices and Packing lists in relation to import of the said three import consignments. As CHA, it is their obligation under Regulation 13 of the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations 2004 [now Regulation 11 of CBLR, 2013] to advise their client to comply with the provisions of the Customs Act, but they have not discharged their obligations under CHALR 04 [NOW CBLR, 2013]. They handled import consignments on the basis of unsigned documents which is illegal. They had similarly handled a large number of past consignments of M/s. Akash Exports which too would have been cases of smuggling and evasion of duty as the subject case. In other words the CHA was well complicit in all such cases of imports by M/s. Akash Exports. The case of Bill of Entry NO.551289 dated 13.07.2010 corresponding to Container No.KKFU7279549 is a clear example where forensic evidences prove such systematic undervaluation done in past cases. 48.2 I therefore, find that the CHA, M/s. Prethvisha Logistics Pvt.Ltd. and Shri Palash Banerjee, Director, Prethvisha Logistics Pvt.Ltd. f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
