JUDGMENT :

Om Narayan Rai, J.

1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is directed against an order in original dated July 01, 2025 passed by the Additional Commissioner of Customs (Port), Customs House, Kolkata whereby penalties have been imposed upon the petitioner under Sections 112(a), 112(b) and 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962 (hereafter “the said Act of 1962”).

FACTS OF THE CASE:

2. Briefly summed up the case run in the writ petition is as follows:-

a) The petitioner is a partner in a Partnership Firm, namely, J.B. Shipping Agency. Earlier, the partnership firm comprised of the petitioner and his wife. After the demise of his wife, the petitioner’s daughter has been inducted as a partner in the firm. However, the business of the firm looked after by the petitioner only. A business entity named M/s. Tshochhen Trading of Bhutan owned by Sri Lhapa Tshering (hereafter “importer”) had engaged the petitioner for filing necessary documentation with the Customs in respect of a Bhutan bound transhipment consignment of detergent powder imported from Malaysia in a fully sealed container.

b) The petitioner was provided with the following documents for the aforesaid purpose - i) authorisation letter in favour of the petitioner, ii) import license of the importer issued by the Government of Bhutan for importing detergent powder, iii) bill of lading, iv) invoice, v) packing list and vi) KYC.

c) The said transhipment was put on hold vide an alert dated June 14, 2024. The petitioner being the Customs House Agent (hereafter “CHA”) provided the authorities of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (hereafter “DRI”) copies of documents related to the import consignment including bill of lading, invoice, packing list, import license, letter of authorisation for CHA, etc, and cooperated with the investigating authorities.

d) On June 24, 2024 the container was examined in presence of the importer, the petitioner and the representative of the shipping agent namely, M/s. Expressway Container Line LLP.

e) Upon such examination, it was found that there was misdeclaration of goods inasmuch as the cargo contained not only detergent powder but also jute bags filled with poppy seeds.

f) Thereafter the importer, the petitioner and one Koushik Basak representing the shipping agent were examined and their statements were recorded by the Customs authorities.

g) On June 24, 2024 the importer for the first time produced an invoice different than the one that was handed over to the petitioner. While the said invoice bore the same invoice number as that of the petitioner, it differed in its content; since two items i.e., detergent powder and khas khas spice (poppy seed) were mentioned therein.

h) The importer stated that the supplier had sent wrong goods and had issued the new invoice as the goods had already landed at Kolkata and that he had decided to clear the items by amending importer license.

i) Thereafter, a notice dated December 12, 2024, was issued to the petitioner by the Additional Director, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Kolkata Zonal Unit thereby calling upon the petitioner to show cause as to why penalties under Sections 112(a), 112(b) and 114AA of the said Act of 1962 should not be imposed upon the petitioner. The show cause notice charged the petitioner with abatement in smuggling and having knowledge of mis-declared consignment. The notice also asserted that the petitioner had intentionally submitted false documents for the purpose of clearance of the import container from the shipping agent.

j) The petitioner replied to the show cause notice initially on January 10, 2025. The same was followed by another reply on May 06, 2025. A third reply was also furnished on June 06, 2025.

k) Ultimately, on July 01, 2025, the order in original was passed whereby penalties under Sections 112(a), 112(b) and 114AA of the said Act of 1962 were imposed upon the petitioner.

l) Feeling aggrieved by the said order in original the petitioner has