Challenger Cargo Carriers Pvt Ltd. Vs Principal Commissioner of Customs (Import) Inland Container Depot (CESTAT Delhi)
The Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Delhi, allowed the appeal filed by Challenger Cargo Carriers Pvt. Ltd., a licensed Customs Broker, against penalties imposed under Sections 112(a)(ii) and 114AA of the Customs Act. The penalties had been imposed by the Principal Commissioner of Customs (Imports), ICD Tughlakabad, New Delhi, through an order dated 21 May 2020.
The appellant had filed Bills of Entry on behalf of its client, M/s Daxen Agritech (India) Pvt. Ltd., for import of “Bulk Reishi Gano Powder-100% Ganoderma and Bulk Ganocelium Powder-100% and Gano Mycelium.” The importer classified the goods under Customs Tariff Heading (CTH) 30039011. The Assistant Commissioner reclassified the goods under CTH 21069099, but on appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) restored the classification claimed by the importer. Subsequently, the Revenue’s appeal before the Tribunal succeeded through a Final Order dated 10 January 2018, which upheld the Revenue’s classification under CTH 21069099.
During the pendency of the Revenue’s appeal, the Customs Broker continued filing Bills of Entry on behalf of the importer under CTH 30039011 in accordance with the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). Customs authorities also cleared the goods for home consumption under Section 47 based on those filings. After the Tribunal’s Final Order, a Show Cause Notice dated 2 July 2018 was issued invoking the extended limitation period. Differential duty of Rs. 8,42,43,922/- was demanded for ten Bills of Entry filed between 3 July 2015 and 23 March 2018. The Principal Commissioner also held the goods liable to confiscation under Sections 111(m) and 111(o) and imposed penalties on the importer and on the Customs Broker.
