2006 (2) TMI 74 - HC - Customs

Appellant who is a qualified Chartered Accountant, had issued false certificates without verifying the records- based on the aforesaid false certificates advance licenses were granted for duty free imports of goods which resulted in duty free imports defrauding the Government s revenue appellant can t take plea that he was ignorant of the actual facts penalty on Appellant (Chartered Accountant) under Custom Act is justified

Summary

Issues:
1. Tribunal confirming penalty on the Appellant for issuing false certificates leading to duty-free imports.
2. Appellant's reliance on a Supreme Court judgment to argue against penalty under Customs Act.
3. Appellant's admission of issuing false certificates without verification and subsequent penalty imposition by Commissioner of Customs.

Analysis:
1. The High Court judgment addressed the issue of the Tribunal confirming the penalty imposed on the Appellant for issuing false certificates. The Tribunal found that the Appellant, a qualified Chartered Accountant, had deliberately issued false certificates leading to the grant of advance licenses for duty-free imports. This fraudulent act resulted in defrauding the Government's revenue by allowing duty-free imports that would not have occurred without the false certificates. The Tribunal refused to interfere with the Commissioner of Customs' decision to penalize the Appellant for abetting duty evasion in imported goods.

2. The Appellant's counsel cited a Supreme Court judgment to argue against the penalty under Section 111(o) of the Customs Act. However, the Court noted that the Appellant admitted to issuing false certificates without verifying any records, as evident from the statement annexed to the petition. The certificates issued by the Appellant falsely affirmed the correctness of the imports and exports, leading to the issuance of licenses based on misinformation. The Court highlighted that the Commissioner of Customs in Calcutta exonerating the Appellant did not absolve him of liability in the present case.

3. The Court emphasized that the Appellant, being a qualified professional, should not have issued false certificates without proper verification. The Appellant's claim of ignorance regarding the actual facts after issuing the false certificates was deemed unsubstantiated. Given the Appellant's role in facilitating the issuance of advance licenses through fraudulent means, the Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the penalty imposed by the Commissioner of Customs. The judgment underscored the importance of professional integrity and diligence in issuing certificates that impact government revenue and trade regulations.