Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2023 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (4) TMI 510 - CESTAT KOLKATARevocation of Customs Broker License - forfeiture of security deposit - levy of penalty - mis-declaration of the goods - statements made with corroborative evidences or not - violation of provisions of Rules 10(a), 10(d), 10(e), 10(f) and 13(12) of the CBLR, 2018 - HELD THAT:- The Bills of Entry were filed in the name of the Appellant with the digital signature of the Authorized Representative of the Appellant, who is a G card holder. The role of Shri Jyotirmoy Biswas in filing of the Bills of Entry is not supported by any documentary evidence except the statements. Mere statements without any corroborative evidence cannot be conclusive proof to establish the alleged role of Shri Jyotirmoy Biswas in the mis-declaration. The Appellant is responsible for the works done by his employee Sh Prabir Majhi in filing the Bills of Entry. As discussed earlier, the Bills of Entry were filed as per the description available in the documents given by the Importer. If there is any misdeclaration in the documents submitted by the Importer, then they are solely responsible for the misdeclaration. To establish the complacency of the Customs Broker, it must be proved that the Customs Broker had prior knowledge about the mis-declared description, before filing the Bills of entry. There is no evidence brought on record to show that the Customs Broker was aware of the misdeclaration. The misdeclaration came to light only after proper investigation by DRI. If there is a mischief done by Sh Jyitirmoy Biswas, he can be penalized for his mischief. Since, he is not an employee of the Customs Broker, the Appellant cannot be held responsible for the misdeclaration if any, on the part of Sh. Jyotirmoy Biswas or the Importer. Thus, the allegation in the Notice that the Appellant failed to exercise proper control over his employees, is not proved and hence the allegation in the Notice about the contravention of Rule 13 ( 12) by the Customs Broker is not sustainable. The revocation of license and forfeiture of Security Deposit, as per the Order dated 08.12.21 passed by the Ld. Principal Commissioner, as not sustainable - Appeal allowed.
|