9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (2) TMI 1262X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sent Appellant under Regulation 17 of the CBLR 2018 and also dropped the proceeding of forfeiture of the part or whole security deposit furnished by the Customs Broker for issue of Customs Broker License. However, a penalty of Rs. 50,000/- was imposed in terms of Regulation, 18 of CBLR 2018. The Appellant against the imposition of the said penalty of Rs. 50,000/- filed the present appeal. The penalty was imposed against the Appellant under Regulation 18 of CBLR, 2018 for the violation of regulation 10(o) and Regulation 10(b) of CBLR 2018 in as much as the G Card holder of the Appellant firm did not obtain the KYC documents as mandated by circular no. 9/2010-Customs dated 08.04.2010. It was also alleged that the Appellant have not verified t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bmits that disputed 50 shipping bills as also 75 shipping bills in the past for very same exporter were physically examined and assessed by the Customs and even let export orders (LEOs) were granted in this regard. The bona fide or exporter as well as export value was as such approved by the Customs themselves which is not in disputes ever. He submits in this fact there is no fault or mala fide on the part of the Appellant therefore the penalty was wrongly imposed. In support he placed reliance of the following judgments: * Network Industries Ltd-2019 (369) ELT 1274 (Tn.-Chennai) * Revannath Gabaji Gawade- 2007 (211) ELT 432 (Tn. Mumbai) * Kunal Travels (Cargo)-2017 (354) ELT 447 (Del.) * Shiva Khurana- 2019 (367) ELT 550 (Del.) * ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd that the valuation of the goods is not the responsibility of the custom broker. The custom broker has limited responsibility of documentation on behalf of the exporter and of course the verification of KYC which is not disputed in present case. Therefore, both the allegations are not sustainable. There is no case of the department that the appellants have colluded with the exporter knowingly about fraudulent export of goods with intension to avail the refund of GST, therefore in absence of any such evidence merely because some fraud was committed by the exporter the custom broker cannot be implicated automatically even though he has no role in the offence of fraudulent export. The judgment relied upon by the learned Counsel directly supp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
