TMI Blog2014 (6) TMI 229X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e present appellant-CHA. - Held that:- From the time of initial investigation itself, Shri C.K. Dawar has clarified that they have never handled the export consignments in question. He had produced various registers detailing various export consignments handled by them and the present exporters were not their clients. It is also observed that the annexures which are purported to be signed by Shri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Managing Director of the said company. Certain unscrupulous exporters exported certain goods by overvaluing and claimed drawback was sanctioned. However, later on, the goods were detained subject to investigation. Some of these export consignments were in the name of the present appellant-CHA. The case of the appellant is that he does not know any of these exporters nor he has handled any expo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion he became close to Shri Sachin Devgire and Chotu has handled all such consignments. It also appeared that at some point of time Shri Sachin Devgire was aware of the fact that some export consignments were being in handled by Shri Shiv Kumar @ Chotu and he had also signed on the annexures. 2. The main contention of the appellants is that they scrupulously followed all the Customs law and pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s signed and in view of this position also, there is no case for imposing any penalty on them. 3. The learned AR, on the other hand, reiterated the findings of the adjudicating authority and stated that this is a classical case of misuse of the export-friendly procedure followed by the department. It is not denied that Shri Sachin Devgire was an employee of the presents appellant and the presen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a G-Card Pass holder and he was not authorized to sign such documents. In view of the above position, the appellants cannot be held responsible and penalty cannot be imposed upon them under Section 114(iii) of the Customs Act, 1962. As far as the second appellant is concerned, investigation has not brought out any role whatsoever and therefore penalty imposed on him is not correct. In the result, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
