9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 1021X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s 2018 (CBLR, for short) and also forfeited the security deposit under Regulation 14 of CBLR and further imposed penalty of Rs. 50,000/- under Regulation 18 of CBLR, 2018. 2. Briefly the facts of the present case are that the appellant was a customs broker and holds Customs Broker Licence bearing No.01/2010 dt. 12/02/2012 valid upto 13/04/2020 issued by the erstwhile Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Thiruvananthapuram. Appellant was also operating under various other Customs stations including Mumbai, Tiruchirappalli, Tuticorin and Chennai. In June, 2019, M/s. Swiss Global, New Delhi approached the Branch Manager of the appellant for undertaking export activities through Trichy port. As instructed by the Branch Manager Shri Sabe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... against the appellant withdrawing the permission to work in Trichy Commissionerate for a month. As the appellant's licence was expiring in April 2020, to avoid any delay in getting timely extension, appellant submitted application for renewal of licence under Section 146 of Customs Act, 1962 in October 2019. While processing his application for renewal, the Commissioner of Customs in the mean time has received Order-in-Original dt. 16/03/2020 issued by the Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) Trichy prohibiting the customs broker to transact business under their jurisdiction. The said order was issued to the customs broker for contravening the Regulations 10(d), 10(n) and 13(7) of the CBLR 2018 in respect of the export made by M/s. Swi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the allegations regarding the violation of CBLR were unsustainable in law. He further submitted that while passing the Final order dt. 14/07/2020, the Tribunal set aside the order of the Commissioner dt. 19/05/2020 as unsustainable in law and directed the learned Commissioner to allow the appellant to carry on his business of CHA during the pendency of inquiry except at Trichy Commissionerate where the alleged violations took place. He further submitted that the Tribunal directed the Inquiry Officer to conclude the inquiry expeditiously and while concluding the inquiry to take into account various decisions rendered by the Tribunal and the High Court which were relied upon by the appellant. The learned counsel further submitted that bo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ter considering the material on record, we, by our detailed order, held that the order dt. 19/05/2020 passed by the Commissioner of Customs upholding the denial of renewal as well as continued suspension of licence was not sustainable in law and we set aside the same. We also noted in our order that when the inquiry was pending, the Commissioner should not have denied the renewal of licence of the appellant for the alleged violation of the CBLR, 2018. Further we find that in the present case, the Department has failed to bring any corroborative evidence or statement of anybody on record to prove that the appellant had information, knowledge or have connived in the overvaluation of the goods or mis-declaration etc. We also note that the law ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
