TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 679X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rned Tribunal. The impugned order is set aside and the respondent s appeal is restored with the learned CESTAT to decide afresh. - CUSAA 24/2021 - - - Dated:- 1-2-2023 - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN For the Appellant : Mr. Satish Kumar, Sr. Standing Counsel with Ms. Vaishali Goyal, Mr. Dhruv and Mr. Atri Mandal, Advs. For the Respondent : Mr. Ramakant Gaur, Ms. Harshi Gaur and Ms. Gauri Chauhan, Advs. O R D E R CM APPL. 40933/2022 1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions. 2. The application stands disposed of. CUSAA 24/2021 CM APPL. 14481/2021, CM APPL. 40931/2022, CM APPL. 40932/2022 3. The appellant has filed the present a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the appeal and to set aside the Order-in-Original No. 12/MK/Policy/2019 dated 13.02.2019 passed by Commissioner of Customs (Airport General), NCH New Delhi in terms of Regulation 18 and 22 read with Regulation 20(7) of the Custom Broker Licensing Regulations, 2013 . 10. After some arguments, it is noticed that the learned CESTAT has not examined various aspects of the matter including whether there was an admission on the part of the respondent that it had not examined some of the aspects of the matter. 11. There is a controversy whether in fact the respondent had used the portal itself as has been stated by the respondent in its letter dated 09.11.2018 sent in response to the Show Cause Notice dated 30.08.2018 (annexed as par ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Shipping Bill No. and the same was done by Ashish Sharma in the present case. Therefore such allegations are baseless and liable to be set aside. 14. Learned counsel for the respondent states that there was confusion in the understanding of the counsel and the respondent s stand that it had not permitted the use of its portal by any other person and had generated the shipping bill itself, has been misconstrued. 15. It is seen that the learned CESTAT had also recorded the respondent s stand in a similar language in Paragraph 13 of the impugned order. 16. It is also contended on behalf of the respondent that if it is accepted that the respondent was remiss in its obligations, the punishment imposed is highly disproportionate. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
