Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) Vs Pramod Nahata (Calcutta High Court)
The Calcutta High Court dealt with an appeal filed by the Revenue challenging an order of the CESTAT which had set aside penalties imposed on a Customs Broker under Sections 112(a) and 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962.
At the outset, the Court condoned a delay of 118 days in filing the appeal, noting that sufficient cause had been shown and that the matter deserved consideration on merits.
On facts, the dispute arose from an investigation into 82 import consignments of readymade garments cleared under the SAFTA Agreement with full duty exemption. The Revenue alleged that the importer suppressed the value of “Free of Cost” materials and relied on tampered or incorrect Certificates of Origin to wrongly claim exemption. The Respondent, a Director of a Customs Broker firm, had filed the Bills of Entry for these consignments.
The Revenue contended that the Respondent played a vital role in facilitating the fraud by submitting defective documents and suppressing material information, thereby violating statutory obligations under the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations. It argued that the Respondent was not merely performing a clerical function but was an essential link in the transaction, contributing to substantial revenue loss.
