TMI Blog2017 (2) TMI 47X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are responsible for each and every act they do in that area. Whether penalty should have been imposed u/s 114 of CA, 1962? - Held that: - active role of appellant in the attempted export is on record and that could not be ruled out by appellant demolishing fraudulent document filed by appellant using IE code of another. The penalty under Section 117 is stricter than Section 114 penalty. Any dereliction in duty by the CHA calls for penalty under the residuary provisions of Section 117 of Customs Act, 1962 - conscious involvement of the appellant with the smuggling racket is proved. Therefore there is no need to interfere with the order passed by learned adjudicating authority. Otherwise, that shall send a message to the society that inf ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the smugglers could not be disassociated by the appellant without any cogent and credible evidence to prove his innocence. He received a consideration of ₹ 10,000/- for filing forged and fabricated documents using the IE Code of a different person Customs brought out association of this appellant with the racket. All such allegations could not be refuted by appellant except the plea of innocence. 4.2 The duty of a CHA is very significant since a CHA works in the customs area which is very sensitive. Law has casted responsibility on the CHA to ascertain every detail of the import or export before filing the respective document for clearance. The adjudicating authority brought out how this appellant was instrumental in the attem ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the appellant was not aware of the contents of the container and what the goods to be exported. He has no answer when the IE Code was found to be of some other person and there was mis-declaration in the exporting documents. Custom was defrauded. It may be noted that a person working in customs area is never an innocent since customs area is a sensitive place and they are responsible for each and every act they do in that area. So also CHALR, 2004 has expectation from the CHA that he should not act contrary to law or make breach of Customs law. His knowledge to smuggling is imputable when he submitted false and fabricated document using IE code of another. Appellant could not come out from such misdeed with any defense. Even today, exc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
