Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2020 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (4) TMI 422 - AT - CustomsRevocation of approval granted to Overseas Warehousing Private Limited to act as custodian of the imported goods - auction of goods - Department proceeded against the appellant alleging that by auctioning the goods appellants have contravened the provisions of regulation 5 and 6 of HCCAR for which action was warranted in terms of Regulation 11 and 12 ibid - principles of natural justice - HELD THAT:- Undisputedly appellants is working as Custodian as per Section 45 of the Customs Act, 1962 for operating as a “Custom Cargo Service Provider” under HCCAR and is bound to function as per the provision of the Customs Act, 1962 and the HCCAR. In case of any contravention of the provisions of Custom Act, 1962 or the HCCAR, action has to betaken against him in terms of the said regulations. From the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962 and HCCAR, it is quite evident that Custodian appointed in terms of Section 45 ibid, do not hold the title to the goods whether before or after the order of the clearance made in terms of Section 47. He holds the goods as custodian of the goods and is bound to follow these provisions while handling the goods while they are in his custody. He could not have dealt with the goods in any manner including sale/ auction of the goods without obtaining written authorization in this respect from the Customs Authority - Undisputedly in the present case the appellant has by his action of auctioning the goods which were in his custody acted without putting the importer to notice and without informing/ seeking permission from the Custom Officer has contravened the provisions of Section 48 of the Customs Act, 1962. Principles of natural justice - HELD THAT:- Commissioner has also failed to take note of certain correspondences between the custom authorities, appellant and the importer in the present case while adjudging the case against the appellant. He has failed to record his findings in respect of these correspondences which were relied upon by the appellants in the proceedings initiated against him. All such correspondences which appellant wish to rely upon in his defence merit consideration and finding recorded - Since it is held that duty in respect of the goods in custody of the custodian if not cleared for home consumption as provided for by in terms of Section 47, needs to be paid by the custodian, amount of ₹ 25 lakhs deposited by the appellant in escrow account to be maintained with the Custom Authority will continue to be in deposit in the said escrow account till finalization of these proceedings in remand. The appeal filed is allowed by setting aside the impugned order and remitting back the matter to the Commissioner for de novo adjudications.
|