TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 609X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntry, having been owned by the importer and in absence of any finding to the contrary and in absence of any finding to the contrary, there is error in holding the appellant CHA as a party in the alleged mis-declaration, there being no case of aiding or abetting made out against the appellant - The penalty imposed u/s 112 (a) is set aside and the appeal is allowed - The stay application is dispose ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd as such as instructed by the importer, the appellant CHA mentioned in the Bill of Entry as Gold Mounting as the consignment contained the goods declared to be various mounting of jewellery items. Further as instructed by the importer, exemption in terms of Notification No. 62/2004 (Cus) was claimed. Vide Order-in-Original dated 16.12.2009 it has been held that the goods have been mis-declared a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re this Tribunal. 2. The learned Counsel for the appellant states that in the facts and circumstances, the appellant has acted bona fide by following instruction of the importer. Attention is drawn to the letter dated 14.10.2009 written by the importer to the Additional Commissioner of Customs, wherein the importer has admitted that as per their instruction to the CHA, the CHA has declared the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... jumbo roll of photographic colour film describing the same as Cinematographic Colour Film (unexposed positive) and claiming the exemption of Customs duty under the relevant Notification. On examination, the Customs department found to be colour film-jumbo rolls and therefore not entitled to benefit of exemption as claimed. It was held that merely because the appellant's claimed that it was e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nal disposal. In my considered opinion, in view of responsibly for the declaration made in the Bill of Entry, having been owned by the importer and in absence of any finding to the contrary, there is error in holding the appellant CHA as a party in the alleged mis-declaration, there being no case of aiding or abetting made out against the appellant. In this view of the matter, the penalty imposed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
