TMI Blog2007 (3) TMI 535X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The appellants filed this appeal against the adjudication order passed by the Commissioner of Customs whereby penalty of Rs. 50,000/- was imposed on the appellants. 2. The brief facts of the case are that appellant is Proprietor of M/s. Chand International (Customs House Agent). The appellant on behalf of M/s. Khyati International, filed six shipping bills regarding export of Auto Gaskets. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the exporter. There is no evidence on record to show that appellants are in any way concerned with over-invoicing of the goods or he has got something extra than their charges. The contention is that as the appellants field shipping bills at the instruction of exporter and all the documents were signed by the exporter, therefore, the appellant as CHA are not liable for penalty. The appellant relie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... value will be disclosed to him subsequently. However, the exporter ensured him that there will be no problem of valuation and the value declared by the supplier will be accepted as he has already consulted the customs. 7. The contention is that the appellant was well aware of the problem regarding valuation. In spite of this, he signed the documents submitted to the customs authorities and the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... made arrangements and that whatever the value will be declared, will be accepted by the customs. In these circumstances, I find in fact the appellants were well aware of the intention of exporter. The contention of the appellant that they were authorized by the exporter, I find that in the letter dated 24-11-99 written by the exporter is only regarding supplying the documents to the appellants and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
