Achhaibar Chaubey v. The Director General, Directorate Of Revenue Intelligence And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2555 of 2018 ====================================================== Achhaibar Chaubey, son of Purushottam Chaubey, resident of House No. 259, Durgawali Gali, Sunderpuri, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh at present House No. 147, Gali No. 2, near railway station, Sunderpuri, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1. The Director General, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, New Delhi.

2. The Director, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Regional Unit, Patna.

3. The Commission of Customs (Preventive), Patna.

4. The Assistant Commissioner (Award) Customs (H.O.), Patna. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

None For the Respondent/s :

Mr.Satya Prakashtripathy ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE JYOTI SARAN) Date : 18-06-2019 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Rajesh Kumar Verma, learned counsel appearing for the respondentDepartment of Excise and Customs. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 10.10.2017 passed by the Judicial Member, Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Kolkata confirming the order dated 17.07.2013 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) Patna in imposing penalty on the petitioner for alleged violation of Rule-6 of the General Terms and Conditions of Agreement as well as on the failure of the petitioner to identify the consignor of the goods and which default led to imposition of penalty of Rs.10 lacs by the Commissioner which amount has been modified by the Tribunal to reduce it to Rs. 5 lacs.

Patna High Court CWJC No.2555 of 2018 dt.18-06-2019 2/2 While the order passed by the Appellate Tribunal confirms to the default, the pleadings on the writ petition do not justify the latches/lapses on the part of the petitioner in not being able to provide the identity of the consignor and which act led the Statutory Authority to believe that the consignment of mobile phones, 'Made In China' were smuggled items and the consignment was an illegal transaction. The order of the Appellate Authority confirms that the petitioner was not able to justify the consignment or to inform about the identity of the consignor thus making himself liable under the provisions of Customs Act, 1962.

The Appellate Authority bearing note of the nature of default in the backdrop of the facts accompanying the matter has been pleased to modify the penal amount to reduce it to Rs. 5 lacs each as against the two noticees including the present petitioner and having considered the reasons assigned by the Tribunal and considering the argument advanced by Mr. Verma, we are not persuaded to interfere with the same. The writ petition is dismissed.

(Jyoti Saran, J) ( Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) Nasimul/Amit AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE N/A Uploading Date 01-07-2019 Transmission Date N/A