TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 771X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not authorised to represent the CHA. This is clearly established from the statement of Shri Deepak Sejpal who in his statement recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act has admitted that he was not authorised to attend the Customs clearing/documentation work and he used the CHA licence of M/s. Dhakane & Co. and it was done with the knowledge of Director Shri Ashok Pandurang Dhakane of the CHA firm. This is also corroborated by the statement of Shri Bala Baburao Jadhav and Shri Vinod Shinde, employees of the appellant CHA firm and therefore, the charge of contravention of Regulation 13 (b) of having transacted the business through unauthorized persons also stands proved. As regards the third charge of contravention of Regulation 13 (d), it is clear that the CHA never dealt with the exporter or the persons authorised by the exporter but dealt with another person, viz., Shri Deepak Dariyalal Sejpal. Therefore, the question of advising the client to comply with the provisions of the Act would not arise at all. In the light of these evidences available on record it is clear that the relevant provisions of the CHALR 2004 have been violated by the appellant. It is in view of these ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ndertaken this work with the knowledge of the Director, Shri Ashok Pandurang Dhakane of the CHA firm. Shri Sejpal also signed the export documents for completing the export formalities without having any authority to do so. 2.2 On completion of the investigation, a charge sheet was issued to M/s. Dhakane Co. wherein it was alleged that the Customs House Agent did not obtain any authorization from the exporter as required under Regulation 13(a) of the CHALR 2004, thereby contravening the said Regulation. It was further imputed that, as per Regulation 13(b), a CHA shall transact business in the Customs Station either personally or through an employee duly approved by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs. In the present case, the CHA had arranged a person Shri Deepak Dariyalal Sejpal for the export documentation by allowing the usage of the CHA licence and therefore, they had violated the provisions of Regulation 13(b) of the CHALR 2004. 2.3 The third charge against the CHA is that as per the Regulation 13(d), the CHA shall advise his client to comply with the provisions of the Customs Act and in case of non-compliance, shall bring the matter to the notice of the Deputy Commissi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Pvt. Ltd. to attend the export consignment pertaining to M/s. Leed Impex. However, without his permission and knowledge, Shri Deepak Sejpal signed the export documents and got the consignment cleared on 19/07/2010 and Shri Jadhav informed Mr. Dhakane about this incident on 20/07/2010. Shri Vinod Shinde in his statement dated 06/08/2010 has also confirmed these facts. Thus, Shri Deepak Sejpal signed the documents and cleared the consignment by putting the signature of Shri Bala Baburao Jadhav on his own. In these circumstances, it cannot be said that the CHA did anything wrong inasmuch as the export documentation was signed by Shri Deepak Sejpal on his own account. The learned Counsel also submits that licence was suspended in 2011 and the appellant had been out of business since then and therefore, that should be sufficient punishment for violation, if any, committed by the CHA and the extreme harsh punishment of revocation of licence is not warranted in the circumstances of the case. Accordingly, he pleads for setting aside the impugned order of revocation. 4. The learned Deputy Commissioner (AR) appearing for the Revenue on the other hand reiterates the findings of the adjudi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... epak Sejpal who in his statement recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act has admitted that he was not authorised to attend the Customs clearing/documentation work and he used the CHA licence of M/s. Dhakane Co. and it was done with the knowledge of Director Shri Ashok Pandurang Dhakane of the CHA firm. This is also corroborated by the statement of Shri Bala Baburao Jadhav and Shri Vinod Shinde, employees of the appellant CHA firm and therefore, the charge of contravention of Regulation 13 (b) of having transacted the business through unauthorized persons also stands proved. 5.3 As regards the third charge of contravention of Regulation 13 (d), it is clear that the CHA never dealt with the exporter or the persons authorised by the exporter but dealt with another person, viz., Shri Deepak Dariyalal Sejpal. Therefore, the question of advising the client to comply with the provisions of the Act would not arise at all. In the light of these evidences available on record it is clear that the relevant provisions of the CHALR 2004 have been violated by the appellant. It is in view of these violations and trying to cover up the violations by the CHA, the licence issued to M/s. Dh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
