Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s. Yogesh Kumar Versus C.C. New Delhi (Import & general)

2016 (5) TMI 1058 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

Revokation of CHA licence, forfeiture of security deposit and imposition of penalty - Regulation 22 of the CBLR, 2013 - exporters attempted to claim huge amount of drawback by resorting to over valuation - Held that:- we really fail to find out any lapses on the part of the CB so as to impose him with a lifelong ban from conducting the business. By referring to the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi’s order in the case of Ashiana Cargo services Vs Commissioner of Customs [2014 (3) TMI 562 - DELHI HIGH .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

erefore, the impugned order is required to be set aside and also revocation of his license, the order of forfeiture of the deposit made by him and the penalty imposed are set aside. - Decided in favour of appellant with consequential relief - C/53677/2015-CU(DB) - Final Order No. 51789 - Dated:- 13-4-2016 - Ms. Archana Wadhwa, Member (Judicial) and Shri B. Ravichandran, Member (Technical) Shri Piyush Kumar, Advocate for the Applicants Shri K. Poddar, DR for the Respondent ORDER The present appea .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

xporters. On the basis of certain intelligence received by the revenue that some of the exporters attempted to claim huge amount of drawback by resorting to over valuation of said exported goods, investigations were initiated against them. During the course of investigation, statements of various persons were recorded. In as much as the present appellant had handled shipping bills of M/s. Sansam Enterprises, the statement of the appellant representative were also recorded, wherein he admitted fi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

esult of the above investigation, the appellant was served with a show cause notice dated 09.10.2012proposing to impose penalty upon him in terms of the provision of the Customs Act. The said show cause notice culminated into an order passed by the Additional Commissioner imposing penalty of ₹ 5 lakhs under section 117 of the customs Act. The Additional Commissioner also recommended suspension of the CHA license in terms of the Regulation 20 of the Customs House Agent Licensing Regulation .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

which in my considered opinion is misconceived as neither CHALR 2004 nor Circular 09/2010-CUS prescribed such personal visit during the relevant time. The circular only required the CHA to verify the credentials by using reasonable means and I observe that the documents obtained by the appellant and verification therefore from their website was sufficient compliance to the requirement prescribed in Circular regarding KYC norms to be adheard by a Customs House Agent. 9. It appears that the export .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ulted. 10. Thus I find force in the submission of the learned Counsel that the appellant had sufficiently complied with the requirement of Regulation 13 of the Customs House Agent Licensing Regulation, 2004and the Circular No. 8/2010 dated 08.04.2010 by obtaining the requisite documents and verifying the same from the respective website before accepting the assignment and hence cannot be held guilty of violation of the provisions of Regulation 13 or liable to imposition of penalty under section .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d the appellant contested the charge before the said enquiry officer, who however did not favour with the same and affirmed the proposed allegation vide his enquiry report dated 25.05.2015. Based upon the said enquiry report the Commissioner revoked the license vide the present impugned order 5. The Lt. Advocate appearing for the appellant has drawn our attention to the present impugned order wherein the adjudicating Authority has simpliciter adopted the result of enquiry report and without inde .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

hallenging the imposition of penalty imposed under section 117 of the Act. The said order of the Commissioner (A) setting aside the penalty on the appellant stands accepted by the Revenue and no appeal stands filed. As such by drawing our attention to various decisions of the Tribunal as also by High Court, it stands held that the appellant s revocation of CHA licenses was neither called for nor justified. 6. Shri K. Poddar, appearing for the Revenue draws our attention to the fact that the inve .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ides we find that there is no dispute about the fact that based upon the same investigation, penal proceedings were initiated against the appellant under the customs act. Such penal proceedings resulted in passing of an order by Commissioner (A) vide which imposition of penalty was set aside . We have already reproduced relevant portion of the order of Commissioner (A). We are informed that the said order stand accepted by the Revenue and there is no further appeal. 8. Once there is a finding by .....

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 Circular no. 09/2010-CUS, a CHA is required to verify the credentials by using reasonable means and such reasonable means would relate to verification of documents obtained from the exporter and verification of the same from the website. Which particular proper norms prescribed under the law or the procedure prescribed by any circular does not stands followed by the CHA? There is no answer to the said question in the impugned order. Otherwise also we find that no discrepancy stands detected in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| 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