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

2016 (4) TMI 971 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2016 (4) TMI 971 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - 2016 (338) E.L.T. 725 (Tri. - Del.) - Revokation of CHA licence and forfeiture of security deposit - Non-declaration of retail sale price on auto parts imported for assessment under Section 4 A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 for CVD - Failure to verify the presence of the importers in the given address. - Held that:- the bill of entry was filed by the appellant after the goods were detained by the officers of DRI. The said bill of entry was filed on fir .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nce committed. In the present case, it is noticed that the punishment of revocation is not justifiable even if it is to be admitted that physical verification of the importerís premises could have avoided the filing of bill of entry by the appellant. Even in such a situation, the violation in respect of the cargo viz. the non-declaration of the RSP on the auto parts, a debatable point of interpretation, cannot be held against the appellant to result in the revocation of their licence. Here, it i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tely discussed in the inquiry report and no sustainable ground for differing with the same could be made out. - Decided in favour of appellant - Customs Appeal No.50267/2016-CU(DB) - Final Order No. 51291/2016 - Dated:- 7-4-2016 - SMT. ARCHANA WADHWA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) AND SHRI B. RAVICHANDRAN, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) For the Petitioner : Shri Priyadarshi Manish & Ms. Anjali Jha Manish,Advocates For the Respondent : Shri Rajeev Gupta, AR and Shri Sanjay Jain, DR ORDER PER B. RAVICHANDRAN: The pre .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

I regarding a consignment of auto parts imported by M/s. Spreet International. The goods were examined on 5.5.2014 and were found to be auto parts as per the packing list and the goods appeared to be covered by the Third Schedule of Customs Tariff Act, 1985 to attract retail sale price based assessment. The goods were detained. The importer filed a bill of entry on 23.05.2014 through the appellant on first check basis. As no retail sale price was found on the packages, the good were seized and f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

have not contravened the provisions of Regulation 11 (a), 11 (d), 11 (e) and 11 (n) of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013. However, the Commissioner vide his order dated 1.9.2015 revoked the Customs broker s licence and also ordered forfeiture of security deposit of ₹ 75,000/- and imposed a penalty of ₹ 50,000/- on the appellant. 3. The appellant approached the Hon ble Delhi High Court by way of writ petition. The Hon ble Delhi High Court vide their order dated 2.11.2015 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

merit. The main grounds of appeal by the appellants are (a) The appellants have fulfilled the obligations as prescribed under Regulation 11 and Circular No.9/2010-Cus dated 8.4.2010 regarding KYC norms for the clients; (b) The bill of entry in the present case was filed after the goods were detained by the officers of DRI. The bill of entry was filed for verification of the contents before assessment, on first check basis. Hence, there can be no allegation of intentional violation of any provis .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t for auto parts covered by the impugned bill of entry. 6. We have heard both the sides and examined the appeal records. 7. We find that the main focus of allegation against the appellant which resulted in the revocation of licence is their failure to verify the presence of the importers in the given address. We have perused the provisions of Regulation 11 as well as the Boards Circular dated 8.4.2010. It is an admitted fact that the partnership firm involved in the import of the auto parts 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

equirement to physically verify the business premises or residential premises of the importer and also to have a personal meeting with the importer before taking up the work for any importer. 8. We also note that in the present case the contravention alleged against the importer is non-declaration of retail sale price on auto parts imported by them for assessment under Section 4 A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 for CVD. We find that the bill of entry was filed by the appellant after the goods w .....

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