Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2021 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (12) TMI 631 - AT - CustomsSuspension of Customs Broker License - allegation of forgery and manipulation of documents committed by the Appellant - regulation 16(1) r.w. 16(2) of the CBLR 2018 - HELD THAT:- The mismatch of date of shipment as per internet tracking system of the impugned consignment, and the Bill of lading date, brought the conflict before the Customs Authorities. The statements of other witnesses also corroborated the same including the shipment tracking record, which proved beyond doubt that even the empty containers were not handed over to the Exporter by 26.04.2021, i.e. the date of Notification restricting watermelon seeds, which was in the knowledge of the CB - emails dated 01.06.2021 sent by CB to the importer states that “we requested everyone to ensure that the tracking of the shipping line is before 26.04.2021. Also, the reply to the shipping line for the e mail dated 01.06.2021 was forwarded on 10.07.2021, well after the seizure was made. Thus, even when the situation was doubtful, the appellant CB chose to file the BOE not as per the Revised Notification, referring the said goods under restricted category. The revenue has relied heavily on the content or the information available on website of shipping lines, which may be erroneous and needs investigation. However, the documents like proforma invoice, bill of lading and the documents like certificates of origin etc., fact of payment before shipment indicates that the submissions of the appellant cannot be brushed aside. It’s not proved that such documents are fabricated or manipulated. It is very difficult to deny the authenticity of the certificates issued by a sovereign Government in the absence of evidence. No such allegation of fabrication of such documents is made. Learned authorised representative for the revenue avers that the investigation is still on. One more evidence that the revenue relies upon is the initial statement of the importer, wherein he is alleged to have stated that he has fabricated documents on the advice of the Custom Broker/appellant. The statement has been retracted. A statement which is retracted or otherwise, and more so not being substantiated by documentary or other proof, cannot be appreciated as evidence - Revenue has not brought out any evidence, whatsoever as to the benefit that customs Broker got by indulging in such activity. There could however, be a gain for the importer. As per the averment of Authorised Representative for the Revenue, further investigations are in progress. The Respondents are directed to restore the CB licence of the Appellant within 10 days from the receipt or service of this order - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|