9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (11) TMI 839X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ble drawback and the same was subsequently confirmed vide Order-in-Original No. 628/2019 dated 29.10.2019. During these proceedings it was found that M/s. Access World Wide Cargo knowing very well that the exporter was not eligible for drawback had filed the shipping bills under the claim of drawback, thus, failed to discharge their obligations of the Customs Broker in terms of the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations 2018. Therefore, the Commissioner in the impugned order imposed penalty of Rs. 50,000/- on the customs broker under Regulation 14 read with Regulation 18 of the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations 2013/2018. Aggrieved by this order, the appellant is in appeal before me. 2. Today, when the matter came up for hearing, the lear ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l submits that the earlier order was not only set aside because of the wrong provisions of Section 114AA of the Customs Act, 1962 but also on merits. He also submits that Regulation 14 has various conditions laid down for revoking the license. After consideration relevant facts and circumstances, the Commissioner had dropped the proposal to revoke the license since none of the ingredients of Regulation 14 were attracted, penalty also should have been dropped. He also submits that under Regulation 18, penalty is imposed for contravention of any of the provisions of the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations. It is submitted by the appellant that he had in his statement clearly stated that the exporter was entitled to drawback under section 75 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mmissioner had misled himself with the wrong facts in concluding that the appellant was involved in the illegal export. The impugned order though is an independent order issued in terms of the Customs House Licensing Regulations 2013/2018, the offence remains the same that ineligible drawback claimed by the exporter ADPL. In the impugned order, the enquiry officer in his report found that "It is seen from the facts of the case that the customs broker has informed the exporter about the non-availability of drawback and exporters have on their own violation opted to go for drawback under Section 75. As such, there is nothing forthcoming in the show-cause notice or the Order-in-Original that the customs broker has imparted any wrong informatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
