Customs – Cestat New Delhi: Appellant merely introduced the actual importer to the IEC holder who agreed for the use of his IEC on agreed consideration for the purpose of import of goods – No violation of law - Appeal allowed [Order attached]

Your free trial / membership plan is expired.
Kindly subscribe to get complete access to indirect tax updates and issue wise cases
Why subscribe to us ?
Get complete access to news updates and download copy of case laws/ notification/ circular etc.
Be a part of our WhatsApp group and read real time indirect tax updates
Access to ready case laws of General Issues and Industry Wide Issues under GST
Access to relevant provisions of law / circular in respect to the issues, along with trail of their amendments
Write your GST query to us for evaluation
Subscription Charges:*
Indirect tax updates -
6 months @299 / 1 Year @499 only
Indirect tax updates + Issue wise cases -
6 months @1199 / 1 Year @1999 only
*Plus applicable GST
Admin
05-Aug-2022 02:18:41
Order Date: 3 August 2022
Facts-
- The Appellant, Girish Kumar Singh is working as clearing agent of imported goods. Habib-uz-Zaman approached the appellant for helping for import of marbles.
- Since Habib-uz-Zaman was not having IEC. Therefore, the appellant introduced M/s Ankit Enterprises to Habib-uz-Zaman and accordingly for a consideration agreed to allow Habib-uz-Zaman to import marbles on the IEC of M/s Ankit Enterprises.
- A show cause notice was issued proposing to confiscate the cigarette and imposed penalty on appellant.
- Being aggrieved, this appellant preferred appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) who vide the impugned order reject the appeal observing that it was this appellant who has arranged the meeting between the IEC holder and Habib-uz-Zaman who is the actual importer.
- Being aggrieved, the appellant is before this Tribunal.
Issue-
- Whether penalty of Rs. 10 lakhs has been correctly imposed on the appellant under Section 112(b) of the Customs Act, 1962 of the Customs Act?
Order-
- The Tribunal observed that the only allegation against this appellant is that he introduced the actual importer Habib-uz-Zaman to the IEC holder, who agreed for the use of his IEC on consideration agreed to be provided by Habib-uz-Zaman.
- Thereafter, there is no role of this appellant forthcoming. None of the co-noticee has stated anything against this appellant save and except that he has introduced the importer and the IEC holder.
- Thus, none of the conditions as stipulated in Section 112(b) of the Act is attracted for imposing penalty.
- Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed.
Related Post
Post Category
Your free trial/ membership plan has expired. Kindly subscribe to get complete access of tax news updates.
Why subscribe to us ?
Get complete access to news updates
Access to the Order Copy of the case law/ Notification/ Circular etc
Be a part of our Whatsapp group and read real time tax updates
Access to ready case laws/ circulars on general and industry-wide issues under GST
Submit your GST issues to us for evaluation