TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (10) TMI 753
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e (Amicus Curie) For the Respondent : Shri N. Sathyanarayanan, Assistant Commissioner (A.R) ORDER PER MS. SULEKHA BEEVI C.S. 1. Brief facts are that, based on information that Chinese made mobile phones are being imported by mis-declaring the goods as branded items, the consignments covered under bill of entry dated 6/11//2012 consisting of 160 packages were taken up for examination at the A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nsparent remarkable sticker pasted upon each Chinese mobile phones. In one cotton box 50 number of Chinese mobile phones model no. V55 were found along with 4 bundles of stickers for mobile phone battery and 4 bundles of stickers bearing the name "Samsung''. It appeared that there is IPR violation in respect of the goods imported. Investigation was conducted and statements were recorded. Show Caus....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ot been able to establish any mens rea for abetment in the illegal import of the goods. The only allegation raised against the appellant is that, the appellant did not observe due diligence to check the antecedents of the importer as required under Regulation 13 of CHALR, 2004. It is pointed out that for such violation, the proceedings under CHALR, 2004 ought to have been initiated by the departme....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... only assisted to file the documents on behalf of importer as required of a CHA Firm. It is not done in his individual capacity. There is no allegation that the appellant committed any act helping the import of the illegal goods. For this reason, we find that the department has not been able to establish sufficient grounds for imposing penalty under section 112 (a) of Customs Act 1962. The penalty....