Steamer Agent Assumes full Responsibility on behalf of Person-incharge of Conveyance for Compliance u/s 148 Customs Act: CESTAT [Read Order]

Steamer Agent - Person-incharge - Conveyance - Compliance - Customs Act - CESTAT - Taxscan

The Bangalore Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), observed that Steamer Agent assumes full responsibility on behalf of person-incharge of conveyance for compliance under Section 148 of the Customs Act.

The appellant, a steamer agent, Forbes and Company Limited, was also included in the proceedings initiated against M/s ASEAN Cableship Pte Ltd, Singapore, along with Too Talk Leong, by show cause notice proposing recovery of duty evaded under section 28 of the Customs Act, 1962 and other detriments, including confiscation of the vessel, for alleged violations under Customs Act, 1962 in relation to ‘stores’, ‘spares’ and ‘bunkers’ while in India.

The appellant, as representative of person-in-charge of conveyance, was held responsible for enabling stay in Indian waters for 1450 days interspersed with occasional sorties outside during a total of 1750 days with only one repair having been undertaken beyond the territorial waters even as 36 episodes of such took place within.

According to the Counsel appearing for the appellant, there is no justification for continuation of the impugned penalty as the primary finding that led to invoking of section 112 of Customs Act, 1962 against the appellant had been effaced by decision7 of the Tribunal allowing the appeals of M/s ASEAN Cableship Pte Ltd and of the master impugning the same adjudication order.

The Bench comprising Justice Dilip Gupta, President and CJ Mathew, Technical Member observed that “There is no doubt that, in accordance with section 148 of the Customs Act, 1962, the steamer agent, as the appellant herein is, assumes full responsibility on behalf of person-incharge of conveyance for compliance with chapter VI of Customs Act, 1962.”

“In such circumstances, the related act of wrong-doing urged by the Learned Authorised Representative has ceased to be and consequently there is no scope for imposition of penalty under section 112 of Customs Act, 1962 on the representative of person-in-charge of conveyance” the Tribunal said.

Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the Judgment

Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates

taxscan-loader