9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (10) TMI 404X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rts of rotten cement concrete bricks declaring the same as "article made of cement concrete specially designed custom made UV radiation and IR radiation heavy cooling properties, wave coated brick faced masonry block made of cement concrete" for claiming huge amount of ineligible IGST Refund and Reward from Customs authority. On the basis of above information, 02 containers, filed in the name of the exporter M/s. Della Enterprise were put on hold/detained at JNPT Port dated 16.11.2018. Containers pertained to Shipping Bills No.8830161, 8830162, 8830164, 8830166 and 8830169 all dated 12.11.2018 and Shipping Bill No.8830165, 8830167, 8830168, 8830170 and 8830171 all dated 12.11.2018. All the Shipping Bills were filed by Customs Broker M/s. Seej India (CHA No. 11/810). 1.2 On examination of consignments put on hold, the goods contained therein were found to be ordinary rotten cement concrete bricks. Representative samples of the goods were collected from both the containers randomly. The said samples were then sealed in the presence of panchas for further investigation and to ascertain the composition and properties of the said goods for proper classification under RITC. From the dat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... M/s. Saachi Exports at Nhava Sheva, Mumbai and accepted the documents from Shri Sitaram Jadhav and not directly from the IEC holders. It is further alleged that Sh. Shashikant Maruti Pol has performed customs clearances without verification of KYC documents and genuineness of the exporters who were allegedly involved in purported IGST refund fraud. It has been alleged that since Shashikant Maruti Pol, G Card Holder of the Appellant CHA firm has failed to perform his duties specified under CBLR, 2018, hence the appellant is held liable for contravention of provisons of Regulation 10(a), 10(e), 10(n), 10(o) and 13(12) of the CBLR, 2018. Based on these allegations, vide impugned order the adjudicating authority has revoked appellant's CB license, imposed penalty and has forfeited security deposit furnished by the appellant. The order dated 25.02.2022 is challenged on following grounds. (i) Appellant was never informed by his G-card Holder about the exports. (ii) G-Card Holder accepted that he has done customs clearance. (iii) CBLR proceedings initiated on the basis of SCN dated 09.10.2020 issued under Section 124 of the Customs Act, 1962. (iv) It is also submitted that no allegati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ), 10(e), 10(n), 10(0), and 13(12) of the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations, 2018. Also penalties were proposed for alleged violation of provisions of Customs Act, 1962 due to CB's conscious and intentional involvement in assisting fraudulent exports and his failure to fulfill his duties as a customs broker. (v) The investigation also revealed that the exporters were involved in several other cases of commercial fraud in the past. The Customs Broker was found to be a habitual offender, as evidenced by a previous order imposing a penalty for failure to comply with CBLR, 2018. (vi) In conclusion, the Customs Broker is alleged to have violated multiple regulations of CBLR, 2018, including Regulation 10(a), 10(e), 10(m), 10(o), and 13(12), and is liable for strict action under the regulations. 4.1 To support his submissions, learned Departmental Representative has relied upon the following decision: (i) Millenium express Cargo Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi reported as 2017 (346) ELT 471 (Tri.-Del.) (ii) Commissioner of Customs Vs. G.M. Ganatra & Co. reported as 2016 (33) ELT 15 (SC) (iii) Baraskar Brothers Vs. Commissioner of Customs (General), Mumbai-20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ll exercise such supervision as may be necessary to ensure proper conduct of his employees in the transaction of business and he shall be held responsible for all acts or omissions of his employees during their employment. 8. We now observe that the original adjudicating authority has passed the impugned order based on following grounds: (i) Regulation 10(a): The regulation requires a Customs Broker to obtain authorization from each company, firm, or individual for whom they are employed and produce such authorization when required by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs or Assistant Commissioner of Customs. However, in this case, Shri Shashikant Pol, a G Card holder and Power of Attorney holder of the CB firm, admitted to clearing exports for multiple firms without proper authorization, indicating a violation of this regulation. (ii) Regulation 10(e): This regulation mandates a Customs Broker to exercise due diligence to ascertain the correctness of any information they impart to a client regarding clearance of cargo or baggage. However, it was found that the Customs Broker did not interact with the exporters directly, instead dealing with a syndicate, and failed to ascertain th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tco India (IEC- 2908000091), M/s. Kalyani Enterprises (IEC-AJQPJ2299F) amd M/s. Intercraft International (IEC-2906003239). The customs clearance works of these exporters were given by Shri Sitaram Jadhav, who introduced himself as a forwarder and he personally submitted the documents like invoices, packing list etc. he did not receive any test report of the specifications of goods. He did not verify the authority of Shri Sitaram Jadhav regarding the export of all above said goods having description 'articles made of cement concrete specially designed customs made UV radiation and IR radiation heavy cooling properties masonary bricks. He did not verify the addresses and genuineness of all these exporters. He stated that he would submit KYC documents of all these 04 exporters received from Shri Sitaram Jadhav within 03 days but failed to submit the same. He did not know any person other than Shri Sitaram Jadhav regarding the export of the above said goods to UAE. He accepted that he had not fulfilled the obligations of Customs Broker in the verification/confirmation/genuineness of these above exporters. 9.3 On checking of IEC of M/s. Della Enterprises it was found to be a dummy firm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
