TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 1045X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sufficient to satisfy that appellant was otherwise observing his statutory duties. The CHA is supposed to safeguard the interest of both the importers and the customs. A lot of trust is pose in CHA by the importers/ exporters as well as by the Govt. Agencies. - any contravention of such obligations even without intent would be sufficient to invite upon the CHA the punishment listed in the regulation. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant. - Customs Appeal No. C/51429/2018-EX [DB] - FINAL ORDER NO. 53398/2018 - Dated:- 17-12-2018 - MR. C.L. MAHAR, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) And MRS. RACHNA GUPTA, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Present for the Appellant: Mr. G.S. Arora, Advocate Present for the Respondent: Mr. Sunil Kumar., D.R. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eing examined, accepted that he was not in touch with the importer and had allowed Shri Narender, Narula and Shri Rupan Baruna to use his CB license for clearance of consignment of the said importers. It was accordingly alleged by the Department that present case is related to mis-declaration of imported goods with intent to evade duty and appellant has failed to advise his clients to comply with the provisions of the Act and has failed to bring the matter to the notice of the Department. Thus, has contravened his duties under regulation 10,11 (a) (b) (d) (e) 11 (m) of CBLR, 2013. Resultantly, an offence report was received in the office of DRI based whereupon the appellant was called to explain as to why his CB License may not be revoked ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Accordingly the order is prayed to be set aside. Appeal is prayed to be allowed. 4. Ld. DR while rebutting these arguments has submitted that the adjudicating authority below has meticulously examined the entire evidence available on record including the statements recorded during the investigation and the documents recovered during the search of the premises of the appellant. The order is reasonably a speaking order and hence is liable to sustain. Appeal is accordingly prayed to be dismissed. 5. After hearing both the parties, we are of the opinion as follows:- The customs broker license of the appellant has been revoked conforming the contravention on his part of regulations 10, 11 (a) (b) (d) (e) 11 (m) of CBLR, 2013. In acc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n part of Shri Sanjeev Saxena that he had sublet the work of clearance of import consignment to both of them. This acknowledgement is very much against the regulation 10 of CBLR, 2013. He has gone to the extent of admitting that the import documents for clearance of the impugned goods were received by said Shri Narula and all the documents provided to the appellant were digitally signed by his employee and holder of G Card Shri Rajveer Singh Patel for the clearance of the imported goods. He had not obtained any authorization in respect of thee companies, they being the clients of Mr. Nrula and Mr. Burua to whom the appellant had sublet his license against the commission charges. Resultantly, they both only were concerned with the actual cle ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ll arise. 9. Though it is the appellant s case that his entire statement is the result of coercive exercises upon him by DRI officials at the stage of investigation but apparently and admittedly there is no retraction to the said statement. There is nothing on record that the appellant ever expressed his grievance before the senior authorities of the alleged coercion. In absence thereof and in absence of any evidence proving the statement to be incorrect, it stands established that the appellant had failed to observe his duties as custom broker as he was burdened with statutorily. The appellant has relied upon D cor Clearing and Shipping Pvt. Ltd. (supra), but to our opinion that decision is not applicable to the facts and circumstances ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
