M/s Buhariwala Logistics vs CC, New Delhi

Misc. application has been filed for early hearing of the appeal on the ground that in another case of the appellant involving similar issue the appeal

has been allowed. Reasonable cause having been shown, the Misc. application is allowed.

The appellant has filed this appeal against the impugned order dated 3.12.2014 in terms of which penalty of Rs.5 lakhs has been imposed on the

appellant among others.

The facts of the case are that ORI booked a case of import of high end luxury cars from foreign suppliers by mis-declaring them as new, although

they were old and registered in the country of export prior to their import into India and thus were second hand cars. It was also found that the cars

were under-invoiced. These cars were being imported by one Shri Sumit Walia. In this case, the appellant was the CHA on whom penalty has been

imposed on the ground of facilitating the said fraudulent imports in violation of the provisions of the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulation,

2004.

The appellant has contended that it was not concerned with the activities of Shri Sumit Walia and his associates and the fraudulent activities

attributed to it were undertaken by Shri G.S. Prince (who was its employee and G card holder) in his personal capacity and without its knowledge.

In this regard, we find that in respect of Appeal Nos. C/58871 & 60232/2013-Cus(DB), the CESTAT allowed the appellant's appeal vide Final

Order No. 55023-55024 dated 17.12.2014 and set aside the penalties imposed upon it on similar grounds and on the basis of similar evidence.

CESTAT in that order came to a finding that there was no evidence to prove the involvement of the appellant, that its employee had suo moto acted

for his personal greed and beyond the scope of duty and therefore the employer (i.e. the appellant) cannot be penalised. For the reasons alike as

mentioned in the above referred order of the CESTAT, we set aside the penalty imposed on the appellant and allow its appeal.