9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 1656X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal is directed against the impugned order dated 15.07.2015 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals), New Delhi, upholding penalty of Rs. 5 lakhs imposed under Section 112(a)(i) read with Section 114 AA of the Customs Act, 1962 upon the appellant. 2. Brief facts of the case are that acting upon a specific intelligence, an allot was issued against Ms. Avhyuvaya Impex, New Delhi in respe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellant was not at all involved with the importer as he has never met the importer and has not connived or colluded for importation of the restricted goods. The ld. Advocate has relied on the decisions of the Tribunal in case of Syndicate Shipping Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CC, Chennai 2004 (171) ELT 72 ( Tri. Chennai), Arif I. Patel Vs. Commissioner of Custom (PREV), Mumbai 2014 (308) E.L.T. 698 (Tri.- Mumbai) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... with CHA or importer in clearance of prohibited goods, penalty cannot be imposed on such person as a mediator/ facilitator. I find that the case of the appellant is squarely covered by the decisions cited by the appellant wherein, it has been held that introduction of middle men and arranging meetings between importer and the middle man is the normal business practice and that by itself cannot lea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
