Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Del) 6872
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Prathiba M. Singh, Shail Jain, JJ
MAYANK GUPTA – Appellant
Versus
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOM(EXPORT) – Respondent
CUSAA 116/2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Navneet Panwar
For the Respondents: Mr. Satish Aggarwala
Mis-declaration of goods and involvement in fraudulent activities are sufficient grounds for imposing penalties under the Customs Act.
Headnote:(A) Customs Act, 1962 - Section 130A - Penalty for illegal export of Red Sanders - Appeal dismissed and penalty of Rs. 10 lakhs upheld by CESTAT - Mis-declaration of goods and involvement in the chain of fraudulent activities established the basis for the penalty. (Paras 5, 10, 31)
(B) Jurisdiction under Section 130 of the Act does not arise when no substantial question of law is identified.
Facts of the case:
The appeal is filed against the upholding of a penalty related to the illegal export of endangered Red Sanders, declared as household goods. Supporting documents were mis-represented, leading to confiscation.
Findings of Court:
The court confirmed the adequacy of the imposed penalty based on the role and actions of the appellant in the fraudulent transaction.
Issues: The main issue pertained to the mis-declaration and its implications under the Customs Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the nature of mis-declaration and the determination of liability under the Act justified the penalty without needing to establish intent.
Result: Appeal dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. hearing mode and appeal under customs act (Para 2) |
| 2. illegal export of 'red sanders' (Para 3 , 4 , 6) |
| 3. role in fraudulent mis-declarations (Para 5 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. dismissal of appeal and upholding of penalty (Para 12) |
2. The present appeal, filed by the Appellant under Section 130A of the Customs Act , 1962, arises out of the impugned judgment dated 18th October 2024 (hereinafter, ‘impugned judgment’) passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter, ‘CESTAT’) in Customs Appeal No. 52761/2019 titled ‘ Shri Mayank Gupta, Director of M/s Sky Barge Freight Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Customs, (Export). Vide the impugned judgment, the penalty imposed upon the Appellant has been upheld by the CESTAT.
3. The present case arises out of a specific intelligence regarding illegal export of ‘Red Sanders’ which is stated to have been received by the Customs Department. Based on the said intelligence, certain consignments were intercepted which on examination were found to contain ‘Red Sandal Wood’ or ‘Red Sanders’. However, the supporting documents which were filed in respect of the same had declared the goods therein as ‘household goods’.
4. Red Sandal Wood has been recognised as an ‘endangered’ species under the international convention CITES and without a proper valid export certificate it cannot be exported.
5. The baggage declaration which was filed in the name of Mr. Vipin Dua was investigated and it was found that the airway bill was booked in the name M/s Sikki Auto India Pvt. Ltd. The said name itself was allegedly a forged name. One Mr. Sarvesh Kumar who was the Customs Broker had prepared all the documentation. Mr. Ravinder Kumar of M/s Vin Global Logistics was a freight forwarder who is also the Appellant before the Court. He had provided the documents to Mr. Mayank Gupta of M/s Sky Barge Freight Pvt. Ltd. who is another freight forwarder who then filed the airway bill in the name of the fictitious company.
6. The entire consignment was seized and the penalties were also imposed on various other individuals who were involved in the chain of preparing the documents for exporting as also the other entities involved. The Order-in-Original was passed by the Adjudicating Authority on 25th July 2019 inter alia imposing a penalty of Rs.10 lakhs on the Appellant. The operative portion of the Order-in-Original reads as under:
“13. In the light of above discussion and finding, I pass the following order;
i. I order for confiscation of the seized consignment of 1103.1 Kgs of Red Sanders under Section 113 (d) and Section 113 (h) (1) of the Customs Act , 1962;
ii. I reject the declared value of the consignment (as mentioned in Para-32 of the SCN) under Rule 8 of the Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Export Goods) Rules, 2007 and re-determine the assessable value of Red Sanders as Rs.2,00,00,306/- in terms of Rule 6 of the Customs Valuation (Determination of Value of Export Goods) Rules, 2007;
iii. I impose Penalty of Rs 50,00000 (Rs Fifty Lakhs) on Shri Prashant Jha under Section 114 and 114AA of the Customs Act , 1962
iv. I also impose a penalty of Rs 75, 00000(Seventy five lakhs) on Shri Prashant Kumar Jha under Section 114 AA of the Act ibid.
v. I impose Penalty of Rs 15,00000 (Rs Fifteen Lakhs) on Shri Servesh Kumar under Section 114 and but do not propose any penalty on him under Section 114 AA of the Customs Act , 1962.
vi. I Impose Penalty of Rs 25,00000 (Rs Twent five Lakhs) on Shri Krishna Chandra Jha under Section 114 and but do not propose any penalty under Section 114 AA of the Customs Act , 1962.
vii. I impose a penalty of Rs 10,00000 (Rs Ten Lakhs) on Shri Ravindra Kumar under Section 114 Of the Customs Act , 1962.
viii. I impose Penalty of Rs. 10,00000/ (Rs Ten Lakhs) on Shri Mayank Gupta under Section 114 of the Customs Act , 1962.
ix. I impose Penalty of Rs.5,00000 (Rs Five Lakhs) on Shri Nishant Kumar Singh under Section 114 of the Customs Act , 1962.
x. I imp
