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

2016 (2) TMI 438 - CESTAT CHENNAI

2016 (2) TMI 438 - CESTAT CHENNAI - 2016 (343) E.L.T. 295 (Tri. - Chennai) - Revokation of Licenced Customs Broker Licence - one of their employees forged the document of export shipment of polished granite slabs. - It submitted that SCN was not issued within 90 days from the date of suspension as per CHALR and also submits that no specific allegation was made for any contravention in the CHALR clause against the appellant. - Held that:- , it is evident that no proceedings initiated against 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

oking the CHA licence of the appellant is unsustainable and liable to be set aside. - Decided in favor of appellant. - Appeal No. C/40896/2014 - Final Order No. 41725/2015 - Dated:- 8-6-2015 - R. Periasami, Member (T) And P. K. Choudhary, Member (J) For the Appellant : Mr N Viswanathan, Adv For the Respondent : Ms Indira Sisupal, AC (AR) ORDER Per R Periasami The present appeal is arising out of the order dt. 5.5.2014 passed by Commissioner of Customs (Seaport-Import), Chennai against revocation .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

.5.2013 vide Order No.21019/2013. However, proceedings continued under Rule 22 of CHALR. Subsequently, SCN dt. 27.9.2003 was issued for revocation of licence and on receipt of the Inquiry Officer Report from the Inquiry Officer and following the principles of natural justice, the adjudicating authority revoked the licence only for a period upto 31.7.2014 and also forfeited the security deposit in full. The adjudicating authority also cautioned the appellant to conduct his business in future in s .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

only on the ground that failure of supervision of their employee. He submits that the adjudicating authority also has clearly held that the act of employee is only for the personal gain where the appellant is not at all involved. The act of employee is beyond the appellant's control. He also submits that Customs have not initiated any proceedings against the exporter for any contravention of export of goods. In the SCN, it was stated that there is no violation in the Customs procedure and 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

s CC Bangalore 2011 (271)ELT 236 (Tri.-Bang.) (3) Worldwide Cargo Movers Vs CC Mumbai 2006 (202) ELT 729 (Tri.-Mumbai) (4) Falcon Air Cargo Travel Pvt. Ltd. Vs UOI 2002 (140) ELT 8 (Del.) 4. On the other hand, Ld. A.R for Revenue reiterated the findings of the adjudicating authority and submits that CHA cannot be absolved from the misconduct or forgery committed by the employee. Therefore, the adjudicating authority rightly invoked CHALR regulation for revoking the licence. 5. We have carefully .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

reproduced as under :- 15. Prima facie the allegation mentioned at Para 8 that the CHA failed to supervise conduct of his employee, is found to be true. However, it is also seen that the CHA is operating in five locations in which a large number of people are employed; that the CHA is operating without any adverse notice against them for the past twenty three years; that they have helped in contribution of over ₹ 100 Crores of foreign exchange per year to the Govt. of India, through their .....

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 years, arguments made by the CHA during the personal hearing and the, written submissions dt. 15.05.2013 and taking into account the decision taken by the Division Bench of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of M/s. Falcon Air Cargo and Travels (P) Ltd. vs Union of India, reported in 2002(140) EL.T. 8 (Del.), in which the Hon'ble Court observed that punishment has to be proportionate to the offence, suspension of the CHA in all 5 locations, where the CHA is operating, will not be com .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

egulation 21(2) of the CHALR, 1984 (now Regulation 20(2) of the CHALR, 2004) is not justified. It is evident from the above order that the Commissioner of Customs was satisfied on the bonafide of the appellants and their performance and relied Tribunal decisions. Further, we find from the SCN dt. 27.9.2003 at para 13.4 that the limited allegation is only the act of forgery committed by employee for personal gain and at para 13.5 of SCN the department accepted that there is no violation committed .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ent i.e. Appellant in the act committed by the employee. In spite of the above findings, the adjudicating authoritychoose to agree with the I.O report and revoked the Licence without any basis. This being the facts of the case, there is no justification for ordering extreme penal action of revocation of licence. 8. In this regard, we find several Tribunal's decisions consistently held that the CHA cannot be held liable for the acts of employee and set aside the revocation of Licence. The imp .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Court order are reproduced as under :- 12. Learned Senior Standing Counsel for the Customs has stressed that the infraction in this case is not a routine matter, but rather, illegal smuggling of narcotics by the G card users. However, given the factual finding that the CHA was not aware of the misuse of the G cards (and thus, also unaware of the contents being smuggled), no additional blame can be heaped upon the CHA on that count alone. Rather, the only proved infraction on record is of the is .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

operating between the Customs Authorities and the CHA is to be taken lightly, or that violations of the Cl-IA Regulations should not be dealt with sternly. A penalty must be imposed. At the same time, the penalty must - as in any ordered system - be proportional to the violation. Just as the law abhors impunity for infractions, it cautions against a disproportionate penalty. Neither extreme is to be encouraged. In this case, in view of the absence of any mens rea , the violation concerns the pr .....

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