Sanjay Prabhakar Vs Commissioner of Customs (Pre.) (CESTAT Allahabad)
CESTAT Allahabad held that imposition of penalty u/s. 114AA of the Customs Act not justified since customs broker was not held responsible for forging any documents for clearance of goods. Accordingly, penalty imposed u/s. 114AA set aside.
Facts- The officers of DRI, Delhi Zonal Unit, Delhi, on the basis of intelligence that counterfeit Vimal Gutkha was stored and attempted to be exported seized plastic pouches meant as packing material for the packing of counterfeit Vimal Gutkha stored in a godown in Kanjhawala Village, New Delhi. It came to the knowledge of the officers that one export consignment containing counterfeit Vimal Gutkha had been cleared in container for export to Kuwait. The said container was detained and examined by the officers of DRI, JRU, Jamnagar at Customs House, Pipavav. On examination, the goods were found to be mis-declared. There were 350 sacks and 246 boxes in the container. The sacks contained pouches of counterfeit Vimal Gutkha instead of Pan Masala as was declared in the Shipping Bill. The mis-declared goods were seized.
Investigation undertaken revealed that the appellant had not fulfilled the obligations of the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations, 2013. Accordingly, penalty of Rs. 25,00,000/- u/s. 114(i) and Rs. 25,00,000/- u/s. 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962 was imposed.
