9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (5) TMI 170X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... us applications. The appeals are by a CHA. The appeal No. C/13/2004 is against penalty of Rs. 1,00,000/- imposed on the appellants by the Commissioner of Customs under Section 114(i) and (iii) and Section 117 of the Customs Act. Both the miscellaneous applications are in this appeal, one of them seeking waiver of pre-deposit of the penalty amount and the other seeking early disposal of the appeal. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nst the exporter of the goods in question. There was no prohibition for export of the goods, nor was any prohibition found by the adjudicating authority. The appellant argues that Section 114 of the Customs Act was not applicable in such a situation. It is further submitted that, though the Commissioner had found his own reasons for imposing penalty on the CHA as early as in November, 2003, he did ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rendered the goods liable to confiscation under Section 113 or has abetted such commission or omission. The appellant has submitted, in this connection, that the penalty under Section 114 imposed on him by the Commissioner of Customs, Trichy, in similar facts and circumstances has been set aside by this Tribunal in Final Order No. 704/2003, dt. 25-8-2003 [2004 (163) E.L.T. 352 (T)] in Appeal No. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 114 when the clearing agent had no knowledge about the illegal acts of the exporter. In the instant case, the Commissioner's order has not held that the CHA had done anything or omitted to do anything in connivance with, or with the knowledge of illegal acts of, any exporter. Therefore, we set aside the penalty imposed on him under Section 114 of the Customs Act. We have already noted that Sect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
