9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (9) TMI 70X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... forcement, Kolkata.The penalty of Rs.8 lakhs has been imposed upon the appellant for contravention of Section 8(1), 72(c) and 73(3) read with Section 49 and 64(2) of the Act of 1973. 2. The learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant is one of the leading sole agent for the World Shipping Line Uniglory Marine in India having its branches at different places. It was served with a Show Cause Notice by the respondent alleging contraventions of the provisions referred to above. A reply to the Show Cause Notice was submitted refuting the allegations made against the appellant. It was submitted that the containers were shipped by the appellant on the instructions of M/s Century International said to have over-invoiced the expo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eavy penalty of Rs.8 lakhs has been imposed. The prayer was accordingly made to cause interference in the impugned order. To support the arguments, the learned counsel for the appellant made reference of the judgment of the Delhi High Court in the case of R.M. Malhotra Vs. Enforcement Directorate and Ors. dated 04.02.2008 where the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Ramesh Kumar Vs. State of Chhattisgarh reported in 2001 (9) SCC 618 and the judgment of State of Haryana Vs. Jaswinder Singh reported in 2003 (109) Cr. Law Journal Page 10 were referred. 5. The appeal was contested by the respondent. It is submitted that the contraventions of the provisions of the Act of 1973 by the appellant were found proved by the Deputy Director who ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellant, diversion of the shipment was on the instructions of the exporter and accordingly there was no illegality in their action or it cannot be said to be a case of abetment at their instance. The appellant was not knowing that export was made under the State Credit Scheme. 9. The allegation against the appellant is that despite issuing the Bills of Lading for shipment to Moscow, it was diverted to Dubai in violation of the RBI guidelines and even in contravention of the provisions of the Act of 1973. The facts on record further shows that the appellant accepted the bookings and they issued to the shippers with a note "Received for Shipments". The containers were initially shipped from Cochin to Colombo in a feeder vessel for conn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he shipping agent issued the Bills of Lading with all the required details, the plea that appellant was not aware of the scheme of exports, etc. and that the containers were merely diverted at Dubai on instructions of the exporters cannot be accepted. 11. We find that detailed discussion about the role of the appellant has been taken note of by the Deputy Director which is sufficient to show that the appellant played an active role in diversion of the cargo and thereby facilitated the exporter committing violation of the provisions of the Act of 1973 and the RBI guidelines. The fact aforesaid would be borne out from the following. 12. The original Bills of Lading were issued by M/s. Greenways, Coimbatore and thereafter instruction for div ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e collectible freight amount at destination Dubai as US$.1050/- per container. The cargo was discharged at Dubai on 26.07.98 (Ex vessel shalamar), Similarly for two other containers bearing Nos. UGMU 1412574 and EMCU 2256107 the concerned Bill of Lading Nos. were UGMU 103800001568 dated 8.7.98 and UGMU 103800001576 dated 9 7.98 respectively. The exporter said to have given instruction for diversion of cargo to Dubai vide letter dated 16.7.98. The containers were loaded on vessel MV LamphanNavee (LN 18). The ship sailed on 16.7.98 from cochin and on the same day it was to be diverted to Dubai without any change in Bill of Lading. The shipping agent filed the income tax return on 14.8.98 declaring the collectible freight amount at destination ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Bills of Lading, the appellants were well aware of the facts that the containers were to be shipped for Dubai and thereby the appellant company facilitated M/s Century International to carry out transactions in violation of the provisions of the Act of 1973 and RBI guidelines. It is necessary to add that Shri Sanjay Agarwal in his statement denied any instructions to the shipping company to divert the consignment. The following facts are relevant for the aforesaid and are given as under. 16. M/s. Century International during the adjudication proceedings submitted that the copies of letters dated 10.7.98 and 16.7.98 purportedly issued by them on their letter head and furnished by M/s. Greenways were forged and not issued by them nor the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
