9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (12) TMI 206X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0 bags, only 10 bags were found to contain dun peas and the remaining 1030 bags were found to contain Chana Dal. When the exporter was asked to produce requisite documents for this export, he could not produce the same and the Chana Dal was seized. Show cause notice was issued to the Exporter as well as to the Customs House Agent. The case was decided by the Additional Commissioner confiscating the Chana Dal and imposing penalty of Rs. 10,000/- on M/s. Rajapoo Ammal Trading Co, Tuticorin, Rs. 7,500/- on J. Molhanraj, Partner of that Company and Rs. 5,000/- on the present appellant. 2. Arguing the case of the appellant, Shri A.K. Jayaraj, learned Counsel submits that the appellant, no doubt was a Customs House Agent. But in the instant cas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or any chance to find the contents of the goods that was transported and when the goods were found to be different from what was described in the shipping bill, he was amazed. The learned Counsel submits that there was absolutely no intention or mens rea on the part of the appellant to help export goods not conforming to the description as given in the shipping bill. In support of his contention he cites and relies upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of Hindustan Steel Ltd. v. State of Orissa - reported in 1978 (2) E.L.T. (J 159) (S.C.) = AIR 1970 SC 253. He submits that the Supreme Court decision has been followed by the Madras High Court in the case reported in 1993 (42) ECC 166 in the case of Union of Indi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g bags contained Chana Dal. He submits that this large quantity cannot be without the knowledge and information of the appellant. He submits that the Commissioner (Appeals) in the order has held that when the appellant was asked to examine the bags containing Dun peas, only one bag containing Dun peas was produced. This shows the connivance of the CHA. He submits that therefore, penalty of Rs. 5,000/- is just nominal which should be sustained. 5. We have considered the rival submissions and we note that in the instant case, when the goods for examination were presented to Custom House for export they did not conform to the description in the shipping bill. Explanation of the appellant was that he prepared the shipping bill on the basis of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
