CESTAT set aside the penalty imposed by Revenue Department due to lack of evidence


Last updated: 28 July 2021

Court :
CESTAT

Brief :
In M/s. Air India Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs [Custom Appeal No. 40035 of 2021 – SM dated July 09, 2021], M/s Air India Ltd. ('the Appellant') was granted custodianship permission for the export of cargo. The Appellant, as a custodian, are duty bound to comply with the provisions of Customs Act, 1962 ('the Customs Act') and allied rules i.e., the Handling of Cargo in Customs Area Regulations, 2009 ('the HCCAR').

Citation :
Custom Appeal No. 40035 of 2021 – SM dated July 09, 2021

In M/s. Air India Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs [Custom Appeal No. 40035 of 2021 – SM dated July 09, 2021], M/s Air India Ltd. ('the Appellant') was granted custodianship permission for the export of cargo. The Appellant, as a custodian, are duty bound to comply with the provisions of Customs Act, 1962 ('the Customs Act') and allied rules i.e., the Handling of Cargo in Customs Area Regulations, 2009 ('the HCCAR').

The Commissioner of Customs ('the Respondent'), made a surprise check at the export shed of the Appellant on August 01, 2019, the Appellant had allowed cargo to move in sterile area without checking the status of Custom clearance i.e. without checking whether 'Let Export Order' ('LEO') given or not.

The Respondent opined that there are shortcomings in the function of the Appellant as custodian like in case of seizure of 'Star Tortoise' dated November 07, 2018 and of 'Red Sander' dated July 29, 2019.

The Respondent issued a Show Cause Notice('SCN') alleging violation of Rule 5 and Rule 6 of the HCCAR and proposing to revoke the appointment as custodian and imposed penalty of Rs 50,000/- under Regulation 12(8) of the HCCAR on the Appellant.

The CESTAT opined that, the allegation by the Respondent in SCN about smuggling of 'Star Tortoise' dated November 07, 2018 is false, untrue and without any basis. There is no evidence to show that the Appellants have any connection to such seizure of 'Star Tortoises'.

Further, w.r.t. 'Red Sanders' noted that the cargo had reached for scanning at 16:45 hrs, the same was detained without conducting the X-Ray scan. It was again scanned only at 17:27 hrs, after the sanction of LEO. The department does not allege that the appellant has done the same with any wrongful intention. There is no allegation with regard to the goods exported under the shipping bill. Therefore, the small time difference which is a shortcoming indeed made by the Government of India carrier, is a condonable lapse.

Thus, allowed the appeal and set aside the penalty.

 

Bimal Jain
Published in Custom
Views : 129

Comments




CCI Pro

Follow us
add to google news


Company
ARTICLESHIP 08 June 2026
Internal & Taxation Article

O P Bagla & Co LLP

New Delhi

CA Inter

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 27 June 2026
CA Articled Trainee And Paid Assistant

SKAA & Associates

New Delhi

CA Inter

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 09 June 2026
Article Trainee

Numbertree LLP

Mumbai

CA Inter

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 18 June 2026
Article Assistance

RB KESHRI & CO.

Mumbai

CA Inter

View Details
Company
19 June 2026
Accounts Executive

Getfive Advisors Pvt. Ltd.

Ahmedabad

CA Inter

View Details
Company
29 June 2026
ACCOUNTANT

SANDEEP AASHISH & CO

Araria

B.Com

View Details
Company
20 June 2026
Chartered Accountant

ANV & Company

New Delhi

CA

View Details
Company
ARTICLESHIP 30 June 2026
Taxation Content Writer Intern

Interactive Media Pvt Ltd.

New Delhi

CA Inter

View Details