9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 1219X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lwoods concealed therein. A Show Cause Notice was issued to the exporter as well as to the appellant invoking section 114 (i), (iii), 114A & 117 of the Customs Act. The allegation against the appellant was that they had failed to obtain and verify the KYC of the exporter for which they were filing the subject shipping bill. It was alleged that they have failed to fulfill the obligation as envisaged under Regulation 11 of the CHALR 2004 by not advising their client to comply with the various Provision of Customs Act 1962 read with Regulation 2 of Shipping Bill of Export (Form) Regulations 1991. The Original Adjudicating Authorities imposed penalty under section 114 (i) and 114 (iii). The same penalty was upheld by the first appellate authori ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ods in respect of which any prohibition is in force under this Act or any other law for the time being in force, to a penalty [not exceeding three times the value of the goods as declared by the exporter or the value as determined under this Act] [ Substituted by Act 32 of 2003, Section 117, for " not exceeding the value of the goods or five thousand rupees" (w.e.f. 14.5.2003). Earlier, these words were substituted by Act 14 of 2001, Section 108 (w.e.f. 11.5.2001).], whichever is the greater; (ii) in the case of dutiable goods, other than prohibited goods, to a penalty [not exceeding the duty sought to be evaded or five thousand rupees] [ Substituted by Act 14 of 2001, Section 107, for certain words (w.e.f. 11.5.2001).], whichever is the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 62. The CHA firm M/s Viksun Carrier (P) Ltd who filed the shipping bill for export of the consignment before Customs was responsible to obtain and verify the KYC of the exporter. Failure to do so is nothing but abetment in the attempted export of the prohibited goods i.e. red sanders. Therefore the CHA abetted the export of prohibited items and thus liable to penal action under Section 114 & 114(iii) of the Custom Act, 1962." 8. From the above observations in the Order in Original as well as in the impugned order, it is seen that they only relate to violation of various provisions of CHALR 2004. On the basis of the said violation, it has been alleged that the appellant had abetted the export of red sanders. 9. The definition of abetment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
