Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (11) TMI 1158 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD

2015 (11) TMI 1158 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD - 2016 (332) E.L.T. 762 (Tri. - Ahmd.) - Prohibition of Custom Brokers - Held that:- Commissioner had prohibited the appellant from working as Customs Broker on the ground that the Importer had not correctly classified the goods imported by them and the appellant had not properly advised in this regard. This is the only allegation against the appellant. - The root cause for the said allegation is import of a vessel for which Bill of Entry No. 698 of 2009-10 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ustoms Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013. We therefore, set-aside the impugned order of the Commissioner. - Decided in favour of appellant. - Appeal No. C/11286/2015 - ORDER No. A/11623/2015 - Dated:- 10-11-2015 - Mr. P. K. Das, Hon'ble Member ( Judicial ) And Mr. P. M. Saleem, Hon'ble Member ( Technical ) For the Appellant : Shri Hardik Modh, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri Sameer Chitkara, Authorised Representative ORDER Per Mr. P. M. Saleem The appellant herein is before us aggri .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

preliminary objection on jurisdiction of CESTAT to hear the matter. He argues that CESTAT has no authority to hear the appeals pertaining to Prohibition of Customs Brokers. Learned Authorised Representative relied upon the decision of the Tribunal in the case of S.N.M. vs. Commissioner of Customs (General), Mumbai 2014 (304) ELT 255 (Tri. Mum.). On the other hand, learned Counsel for the appellant take us to the provisions of CBLR 2013 and points out Regulation 21, which reads as follows:- 21. A .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f the said decision is reproduced below for better appreciation:- 8. In my view, the view expressed by CESTAT, Mumbai in S.N.M. Agency (supra) is clearly erroneous. The learned counsel for the respondent also contends that the appeal against orders of Commissioner of Customs are being entertained and the decision of CESTAT, Mumbai in S.N.M. Agency (supra) is not being followed. 3. On perusal of the provisions of Regulations 2013 (supra) and the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court (supra .....

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 specially designed to support the platform installations in emergencies and perform various functions such as fire and / or other natural calamities. This offshore support vessel is subjected to duty. The sole purpose of this vessel is not just Supply i.e. carrying of goods, but support i.e. multi functional activities such as fire fighting, rescue operations for platform installations, perform surveys and pollution control etc. Hence, it is clear that the purpose of importing the vessel Great .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

classification of goods imported by them. Also CHA fails to advise the said party to comply with the provisions of the Act. In case of non-compliance, the CHA shall bring the matter to the notice of the department. As per the Regulation 13(d) and (e) of Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 2004 (now Regulation 11(d) and (e() of Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013), a Custom House Agents shall advise his client to comply with the provisions of the Act and in case of non-compliance, .....

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 part of CHA, they rendered themselves liable action under CHALR, 2004 for violation of Regulation 13(d) and (e) of Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 2004 (now Regulation 11(d) and (e) of Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013). 5. Thus, it is observed that the learned Commissioner had prohibited the appellant from working as Customs Broker on the ground that the Importer had not correctly classified the goods imported by them and the appellant had not properly advised in this r .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e on the said Bill of Entry, reads as follows:- CH. Pipavav./Port Anchorage / 11.03.10 Inspected and examined vessel as PSV-GREATSHIP Dhwani Norway. Yr. of 2008, SMO No. 9392846. Type Platform supply vessel, including machinery. Ship stores, provision store etc. wrt. B/E No. F.698/09-10 Dt. 09.03.10. Invoice No. GSY. 04.0226023 Dt, 09.02.10, also checked description as declared in B/E. The Bunker store verified with surveyor M/s. Sisma Munic Surveyor, Pipavav. Representative sample of memo drawn .....

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