The key points are: misdeclaration of goods by the importer ...

Importer's misdeclaration doesn't make Customs Agent vicariously liable for penalty; active illegal act required.

Case Laws Customs

September 23, 2024

The key points are: misdeclaration of goods by the importer cannot render the Customs House Agent (CHA) vicariously liable for penalty u/s 112(a) of the Customs Act 1962. To impose penalty, there must be a positive act or omission by the CHA rendering the goods liable for confiscation. Mere abetment by the CHA's employees is insufficient without evidence of illegal acts. The Tribunal's decision in Rajesh Maikhuri's case supports this view. Consequently, the penalty imposed on the appellant CHA is unsustainable and set aside.

View Source

← Previous Next →

The key points are: misdeclaration of goods by the importer ...

Importer's misdeclaration doesn't make Customs Agent vicariously liable for penalty; active illegal act required.

Case Laws Customs

September 23, 2024

You may also like:

Misclassification and Wrongful Claim of MEIS Benefits - Exports of quilts containing cotton/polyester - Levy of penalties - The CESTAT found the appellant guilty of...

Imposition of penalties u/s 112(a) of the Customs Act 1962 on Customs broker - import of used Multifunction Digital Photocopiers and Printers - it is alleged that the...

Levy of penalty u/s 112(a) of the Customs Act, 1962 on an employee of the Customs Broker - classification of imported goods - The commissioner has recorded as finding...

Customs authority rejected transaction value declared by importer and enhanced value based on email evidence and statement of partner admitting negotiated higher price....

Recovery of differential duty (SAD) u/s 28(1) of CA for the imports made in all the Bills of Entry along with interest and penalties - The Tribunal confirmed the...

Levy of penalty on CHA - The appellate tribunal examined the case where penalties were imposed on appellants for allegedly failing to verify the antecedents of an...

Whether penalty can be imposed upon the importer for some misdeeds of the employee of their clearing agent during customs clearance of their imported goods - No penalty - AT

Levy of penalty u/s 112 (a) of the Customs Act 1962 - Customs House Agent (CHA) - violation of Regulation 13 of CHALR 2004 - It is alleged that the appellant did not...

Enhancement of penalty, levied on Employee of CHA - appellant was reckless and negligent in using the Customs House Agent Licence of his Employer. - Smuggling - red...

Customs broker's license revocation set aside, penalty upheld - broker verified importer details on government website as per regulations, no evidence of prior knowledge...

Levy of penalty on customs broker - The Customs Broker has a very important position and has to safeguard the interest of both the importer and the Customs - The...

Confiscation - importer - the definition of 'importer' under Section 2 (26) of the Customs Act, 1962 - AT

Levy of Penalty u/s 112 (a) and (b) and 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962 - Abetment in mis-declaration of goods and evasion of duty - The appellants were accused of being...

Levy of Customs duty - importer of vessel "M.V. Vishwa Yash" or not - deemed importer - as the permission was granted in favour of the SCI, the respondent cannot be said...

Penalty levied u/s 112(b) of Customs Act challenged due to lack of proper evidence. Appellant obtained PNR movement documents from steamer agent for cargo movement from...

Quick Updates: