9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 684X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Vasan & Sons (Bombay) vide Order No. 68/2017-18 dated 30.1.2018 pending enquiry proceedings under regulation 20 of CBLR, 2013. 2. Shri Suresh Balasubramanian, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the suspension of CB license can only be made if there is a serious nature of case against the Customs Broker and in such case, the suspension is effected immediately. However, in the present case, there was no urgency for suspension of the license, which is evident from the action of the Department, inasmuch as the DRI initiated the investigation in June, 2017 itself and the statement of the partner of the appellant firm was recorded in November, 2017, no investigation report was forwarded during that time. A show-ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ese facts, whether the parts imported in SKD form would attract Anti Dumping duty, which is otherwise applicable to the import of axles as such is the matter of grave interpretation. Therefore, in this nature of case, the appellant being a custom broker cannot be made responsible for alleged evasion of Anti Dumping duty. This is not a case where the importer has declared parts of axles and imported the axles to circumvent the Anti Dumping duty, whereas whatever goods were imported the same were correctly declared before the Customs, Therefore, the appellant cannot be punished as no offence is attributable to the appellant. 3. On the other hand, Shri Ahibaran, learned Additional Commissioner (AR) appearing on behalf of the Revenue reiterate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... violation is of year 2005 as the import had taken place in Sept, 2005 and order of suspension was issued on 30.10.2006, which indicated that there was no emergency, which required license to be suspended. Accordingly, the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. In the present case also, the license was suspended almost after 8 months from the detection of the case of alleged evasion of Anti Dumping duty. Since the appellant was allowed to work as Customs Broker for almost 8 months from the date of alleged offence of the import, there is no harm in allowing the appellant to continue as Customs Broker till the final outcome of the proceedings being carried out under CBLR, 2013. 4.1 We have also observed that as per the merit of the alleged offen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
