GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (10) TMI 1909 - MADRAS HIGH COURT

2015 (10) TMI 1909 - MADRAS HIGH COURT - 2015 (326) E.L.T. 150 (Mad.) - Prohibition on working as Customs House Agent - Allowed unauthorized persons to handle customs clearance work; cleared consignments of pharmaceuticals and drugs, without import licence - Petitioner contended that impugned order has been passed without jurisdiction - Held That:- great confidence is reposed in a CHA. Any misuse of such position by the CHA will have far reaching consequences in the transaction of business by th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

to advise their client to comply with provisions of Act, but also failed to bring the matter to notice of Assistant Commissioner of Customs/Deputy Commissioner of Customs and never tried to verify the antecedents of importer and relied upon third parties; thus failed to act in a bona fide manner Impugned order is sustainable Decided in favour of Revenue. - WP. No. 16832/2015, MP. No. 1/2015 - Dated:- 13-10-2015 - The Honourable Mr. Justice R. Mahadevan, J. For the Petitioner : Mr. Hari Rad .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

. The Petitioner had acted as a customs house agent for various importers. During the year 2012-2013, on investigation the Department alleged that one Company by name, M/s. Antonie and Becouerel Organic Chemical Company had cleared raw materials used to manufacture drugs and pharmaceuticals without import licence issued under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 and without Assistant Drug Controller's clearance. The Respondent, vide order dated 12. 7. 2013 prohibited the Petitioner from working .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

y proceedings by the Cochin Customs and as against the same the Petitioner filed an appeal in C. 40192/2014-DB before the Tribunal. In the meantime, the Commissioner of Customs, Cochin had passed an order in original dated 7. 4. 2014 imposing penalty of R. 10,000/- on the Petitioner Company and thereafter, the Tribunal after considering the said order dated 7. 4. 2014, passed final order in No. 40781/2014 dated 15. 10. 2014, directing the Respondent to pass necessary orders. On repeated reminder .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

a Sathish, an employee of the Petitioner Company, who is the authorised signatory of the customs broker for their Chennai operations. A report was received from ACIU informing that during investigation of a case pertaining to clearance of raw materials used to manufacture drugs and pharmaceuticals, without import license and assistant drug controller's clearance, imported by M/s. Antoine and Becouerel Organic Chemical Co. , Chennai, it was found that bills of entry were filed in the name of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

and Logistics Pvt. Limited with the help of Sh. Satheesan B. Menon (authorised signatory of M/s. The Trading Corporation pvt Limited) who was running his own firm M/s. SL Shipping Services along with his wife Liza Sathish (also 'G' card holder and authorised signatory of the Petitioner Company). Sh. Sourirajan has also utilized the services of Sh. B. karthik, 'H' Card Holder of the Petitioner Company and Sh. M. Kanna, 'G' card holder of M/s. Steadfast International. In t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Chennai Airport in the capacity as Branch manager of CHA, M/s. The Trading Corporation pvt Limited; that he utilized his office and banner for clearance of some consignments; that during December 2012, one Sh. Sandeep contacted him and asked whether he could clear their imports of pharmaceuticals chemicals at Chennai Airport; that he enquired from Sh. Kannan, who was a 'G' Card holder of CHA, M/s. Steadfast International Pvt. Limited engaged in clearing of similar consignments, about fe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Kannan, who effectively carried out Customs examination and obtained out of charge (OOC) order from the shed A. O. ; that he did not possess any CHA license; that he utilized Sh. Satheesan B. Menon's Office and some CHA's licenses under which his client's Bills were cleared. c. M. Kannan, in his voluntary statement, dated 20. 4. 2013, stated that actually he used to cut the word verify ADC clearance in hard copy of open order copy and scribble something like signature and presented t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

osed their Chennai operations during May 2012; that subsequently he started using CHA license of M/s. Evertrust Shipping and Logistics Pvt. Limited and used it till 31. 3. 2013; that after that he got transfer license in the name of M/s. Cappithan Agencies with his wife Liza Sathish as authorized signatory; that he misused the CHA license of M/s. The Trading Corporation Pvt Limited, M/s. Evertrust Shipping and Logistics Pvt Limited and M/s. Cappithan Agencies; that he allowed Sh. Sourirajan to u .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

card in March 2013; that M/s. Cappithan Agencies started filing bills from April 2013 onwards; that so far they have filed 5 bills of entry for M/s. Antoine and Becouerel Organic chemical Company, out of which, three bills of entry were cleared by their staff Sh. Karthick and 2 bills of entries were pending for clearance; that the said importer has imported pharmaceuticals chemicals/drugs, which required a valid import license and ADC's clearance; that she was aware that the three consignme .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s and circumstances, it appeared that the customs broker allowed unauthorized persons to handle customs clearance work, who in turn used this opportunity to clear the consignments of pharmaceuticals and drugs without ADC's clearance in contravention of the provisions of the Drug and Cosmetics Act, 1940 and the rules made thereunder and hence, there had been major lapses on the part of the Petitioner, inasmuch as:- 1. The Customs broker allowed Sh. Sourirajan and Sh. Satheesan B. Menon to fil .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ersonally or through an authorised employee, as required under Regulation 13(b) of CHALR, 2004 (now Regulation 11(b) of the CBLR, 2013). 3. Liza Sathish, authorised signatory of the customs broker in her statement accepted that she was aware that the three consignments cleared by them for the said importer were cleared without ADC's clearance; that as CHA she is responsible for clearance of the said consignments without ADC's clearance; that as a signing authority, she should have advise .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nts of the importer and relied upon Sh. Satheesan B. Menon and hence, contravened the provisions of Regulation 13(o) of the CHALR, 2004 (now Regulation 11(n) of the CBLR, 2013). f. In view of the above, it was found that a prima facie case existed against the Customs broker M/s. Cappithan Agencies and if the said customs broker was allowed to continue to operate, it would be detrimental to the interest of revenue and therefore, it was necessary to take immediate action against the said customs b .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

missioner of Customs, Cochin (license issuing authority) to initiate further action against the Customs Broker. The Commissioner of Customs, Cochin issued a show cause notice to the Customs Broker under Regulation 20 of CBLR, 2013, vide F. No. S34/07/2013 I&B Cus. Dated 24. 10. 2013. In the meanwhile, aggrieved by the prohibition order dated 12. 07. 2013, the Customs Broker filed WP. No. 19670/2013, which was disposed of by order dated 24. 9. 2013, giving liberty to the Customs Broker to sub .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

cted in a bona fide manner as a customs broker, it was beyond doubt that the customs broker had failed to fulfil their obligations under the Regulations 12, 13(b), 13(d) and 13(o) of CHALR, 2004 (now Regulation 10, 11(b), 11(d) and 11(o) of CBLR, 2013), as alleged in the prohibition order dated 12. 07. 2013 and the Commissioner of Customs (Imports) continued the prohibition of the customs broker's licence vide order in original No. 22447/2013, dated 12. 11. 2013 and as against the same the c .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

by the Commissioner of Customs, Chennai VIII, by order dated 29. 5. 2015 in Order in Original No. 38294/2015 for the reasons stated above. g. Clause 5. 2 of Circular No. 09/2010 clearly indicates that the Commissioner of Customs who had authorised the CHA to operate on 'C' form intimation at a Customs Station, may take action in deserving cases under Regulation 21 of CHALR, 2004 for prohibiting the working of such defaulting CHA in any section of the Custom House/Custom Station. Since t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ority itself has permitted the Petitioner to operate the license and has only imposed a penalty of ₹ 10,000/- and that the Respondent cannot go beyond more than the punishment that is contemplated by the Customs Commissionerate, who had issued the licence and that if the license issuing authority does not revoke the license, the prohibitory order ought to be withdrawn and as the licensing authority has not revoked the license, the Respondent has no jurisdiction to continue the prohibition .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

investigation revealed that a prima facie case existed against the Petitioner and if the Petitioner was allowed to continue to operate, it would be detrimental to the interest of revenue and therefore, it was necessary to take action against the Petitioner to prevent them from further misuse of their licence and that in exercise of powers conferred under the provisions of Regulation 21, the Petitioner was prohibited from operating in the jurisdiction of Chennai Customs Zone and prayed for dismi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ce and without ADC's clearance and hence, the Respondent by order dated 12. 7. 2013, prohibited the Petitioner from working as a Customs House Agent. On the representation of the Petitioner, the Respondent again passed an order dated 12. 11. 2013, continuing the prohibition order and in the appeal, the Tribunal passed final order dated 15. 10. 2014, directing the Respondent to pass necessary orders. In the meantime, as per the order of the the Commissioner of Customs, Cochin, the Petitioner .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

gation and on the basis of the statements made from the concerned parties, the Respondent Department found that the Petitioner/ Customs Broker allowed unauthorized persons to handle customs clearance work, who in turn misused the opportunity to clear the consignments of pharmaceuticals and drugs, without import licence and without ADC's clearance, in contravention of the provisions of the Drug and Cosmetics Act, 1940 and the Rules made thereunder and hence, there had been major lapses on the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Commissioner of Customs at a customs station who had authorised a CHA to operate on 'C' form intimation, should inform the details of violations to the Commissioner of Customs at the customs station from where the CHA licence was issued for such CHA, so that necessary action for suspension or revocation of CHA licence, could be initiated by him. This would avoid duplication and ensure uniformity in adjudication of a case against a CHA in suspension or revocation proceedings by the Custom .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

granted or renewed in favour of the licensee and no licence shall be sold or other transferred. (iii) Regulation 13(b) of the CHALR, 2004 (now Regulation 11(b) of the CBLR, 2013), reads as under:- A CHA shall transact business either personally or through an employee duly approved by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs or Assistant Commissioner of Customs. (iv) Regulation 13(d) of the CHALR, 2004 (now Regulation 11(d) of the CBLR, 2013) reads as under:- A CHA shall advise his client to comply wit .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n. 11. It was found, on the investigation and the statements made from the parties concerned that (1) the Petitioner/the Customs broker allowed Sh. Sourirajan and Sh. Satheesan B. Menon to file documents on their behalf and signed documents for them, without verifying the details of the documents and by allowing unauthorized persons to misuse their license, the customs broker transferred their license to third party, in contravention of the Regulation 12 of CHALR, 2004. (Now Regulation 10 of CBL .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he notice of Assistant Commissioner of Customs/Deputy Commissioner of Customs and thus, violated the provisions of Regulation 13(d) of the CHALR, 2004 (now Regulation 11(d) of the CBLR, 2013) and (4) the Petitioner/customs broker never tried to verify the antecedents of the importer and relied upon Sh. Satheesan B. Menon and hence, contravened the provisions of Regulation 13(o) of the CHALR, 2004 (now Regulation 11(n) of the CBLR, 2013). 10. Clause 5. 2 of Circular No. 09/2010 clearly indicates .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ion, written submissions and being heard. However, there is no evidence produced by the Petitioner to show that they fulfilled their obligations under the said provisions of Act, Rules and Regulations. The payment of penalty of ₹ 10,000/- by the Petitioner would go to show the acceptance of the order of the Respondent. 12. Therefore, it is finally concluded that in contravention of the above said provisions of the Act, Rules and Regulations, the Petitioner/custom brokers allowed third part .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r as per the said provisions. 13. The very purpose of granting a licence to a person to act as a Customs House Agent is for transacting any business relating to the entry or departure of conveyance or the import or export of goods in any customs station. For that purpose, under Regulation 9 necessary examination is conducted to test the capability of the person in the matter of preparation of various documents determination of value procedures for assessment and payment of duty, the extent to wh .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version