INTERNATIONAL CARGO SERVICES Vs. COMMR. OF CUS. (EXPORT)
LAWS(CE)-2015-4-13
CUSTOMS EXCISE AND GOLD(CONTROL) APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Decided on April 01,2015

INTERNATIONAL CARGO SERVICES Appellant
VERSUS
Commr. Of Cus. (Export) Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

SUNIL SHIPPING AGENCY V. CC,MUMBAI [REFERRED TO]
JASJEET SINGH MARWAHA VS. UNION OF INDIA (UOI) AND ORS. [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)Ashok Jindal, Member (J)
(2.)THE appellant is in appeal against the impugned order imposing penalty under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962. The facts of the case are that the appellant is a CHA and filed shipping bills in the name of M/s. Sanjay Sales Corporation for export of various textile items which are highly overvalued. The shipping bills were filed under claim of drawback of Rs. 8,82,464/ -. The allegation against the appellant is as under:
"CHA M/s. International Cargo Services (License No. R -61/98), while filing shipping bill in respect of the said exporter failed to ascertain the genuineness of the said exporter, namely M/s. Sanjay Sales Corporation and filed the documents and handles Customs clearance relating to the attempted export of the seized goods under said shipping bills and transacted business for non -existent/non -traceable exporter. They did not deal with the exporter directly but only through mediator and thus failed to take sufficient precautions before taking up Customs clearance job on behalf of the said exporter. They also failed to obtain the authorization from the exporter as required under Regulation 13 of the CHA Licensing Regulations, 2004. They also failed to make available the exporter to join in Customs investigation. Therefore, by his acts of omissions and commissions, Sh. S.S. Gaur, Proprietor of M/s. International Cargo Services, CHA appears to have facilitated/abetted the said exporter in the attempt to export poor quality sub -standard and highly overvalued goods under claim of undue drawback amount which appeared to be liable for confiscation under Section 113(d) and 113(i) of the Customs Act, 1962."

The adjudication took place and the penalty on the appellant is confirmed as per show cause notice of Rs. 8,82,464/ - under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962. Aggrieved from the said order appellant is before me.

(3.)THE ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that the allegation made in the show cause notice are totally incorrect. In fact, the appellant has filed proper authorization obtained from the exporter under Regulation 13 of the CHALR, 2004 and also found the genuineness of the exporter by verifying the IEC from DGFT. Further, the appellant has also obtained the verification report from the Punjab National Bank whether the exporter was having the different bank account with them. The only fault of appellant is that appellant did not meet personally to the exporter and same is not the requirement for a CHA to deal with the exporter of the goods. Therefore, the allegations against the appellant are not sustainable. Consequently, the impugned order is required to be set aside. He further submits that the appellant acted under good faith and Revenue has not been able to bring out any evidence to show that appellant was aware that the exporter was fraudulent or that there was any undue claim of drawback by exporter.
;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.