SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Online)(CESTAT) 493

CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE

TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI

REGIONAL BENCH

Customs Appeal No. 85930 of 2022

(Arising out of Order-in-Original CAO No. 147/CAC/PCC(G)/SJ/CBS Adj dated

28.03.2022 passed by the Principal Commissioner of Customs (General),

Mumbai-I)

M/s. Geeta Vijay Logistics

Appellant

138, Agrawal Trade Centre,

Plot No.62, Sector 11, CBD Belapur,

Navi Mumbai 400 614.

Vs.

Commissioner of Customs (General), Mumbai Respondent

New Custom House, Ballard Estate, Mumbai 400 001.

Appearance:

Shri N.D. George, Advocate, for the Appellant

Shri

S.K.

Hatangadi,

Assistant

Commissioner,

Authorised

Representative for the Respondent

CORAM:

HON’BLE MR. SANJIV SRIVASTAVA, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)

HON’BLE DR. SUVENDU KUMAR PATI, MEMBER (JUDICIAL)

Date of Hearing: 24.01.2023

Date of Decision: 24.01.2023

FINAL ORDER NO. A/85153/2023

PER: SANJIV SRIVASTAVA

This appeal is directed against Order-in-Original CAO No.

147/CAC/PCC(G)/SJ/CBS Adj dated 28.03.2022 passed by the

Principal Commissioner of Customs (General), Mumbai-I. By the

impugned order, Principal Commissioner has held as follows:-

“I, Principal Commissioner of Customs (General), in exercise of

the power conferred upon me under Regulation 17(7) of the

CBLR, 2018, pass the following order:

(i) I hereby impose penalty of Rs. 50,000/- (Rupees Fifty

Thousand only) on M/s. Geeta Vijay Logistics, CB No. 11/2391

[PAN No. AWIPS1442CCH001) under Regulation 18 of the CBLR,

2018.

C/85930/2022

2

(ii) I hereby order for forfeiture of entire amount of security

deposit furnished by the CB, under Regulation 14 of the CBLR,

2018.

(iii) The CB License No.11/2391 is ordered to be revoked under

Regulation 14 of the CBLR, 2018.

(iv) 1 hereby order that the CB surrender the original License as

well as all the 'F', 'G' & 'H' cards issued there under immediately

This order is passed without prejudice to any other action which

may be taken against the Customs Broker and their employees

under the Customs Act, 1962, or any other act for the time being

in force in the Union of India.”

2.1

Appellant is a Customs broker.

2.2

An intelligence was gathered that one M/s. Bansi

Enterprises (IEC No. BSZPB3689J) had imported amino acid for

agricultural use for which Bill of Entry No. 7428890 was filed

through the appellant misdeclaring description, quantity and

value with the intention to circumvent the applicability of

mandatory registration required for the import of these goods

from the Central Insecticides Board, under Section 9 of the

Insecticides Act, 1968 and to evade customs duty leviable

thereon.

2.3

It was also gathered that the goods have been misdeclared

and the actual goods concealed from prohibited goods under the

Schedule of Insecticides Act.

2.4

After investigations were undertaken, a show cause notice

dated 30.12.2020 was issued to the importer and others

involved. Joint Commissioner in his order dated 24.02.2021

observed as follows:-

“40. Insofar as the 2nd charge against the CB is concerned,

I find that the present case is one where an adjudication

of a Show Cause Notice under the Customs Act, 1962 is

being decided. Therefore, the charge that the Custom

Broker has not followed the obligations stipulated under

C/85930/2022

3

Regulation

10

of

the

Customs

Brokers

Licensing

Regulations, 2018 cannot be dealt by me in these

proceedings. Therefore, this part of the charge levelled

against them in the impugned Show Cause Notice is not

maintainable and has to be dropped in these proceedings

under the Customs Act, 1962 for want of jurisdiction.

However, a copy of this Order in Original is being

endorsed to the Hon'ble Principal Commissioner of

Customs (Gen), 2nd Floor, New Custom House, Ballard

Estate, Mumbai 400 001 for taking appropriate action

under the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018.”

He refrained from imposing any penalty under the Customs Act

on the appellant.

2.5

Taking note of the observation made in the order-in-

original, a show cause notice dated 15.07.2021 was issued to

the appellant asking them to show cause as to why the licence

bearing No.11/2391 issued to them should not be revoked and

security deposited should not be forfeited and/or penalty should

not be imposed under Regulation 14 read with 17 & 18 of the

CBLR, 2018 for their failure to comply with the provisions of

Regulation 10(d), (e) & (m) of the CBLR, 2018.

2.6

After conducting enquiry proceedings, the show cause

notice has been adjudicated by the Principal Commissioner as

per the impugned order referred in para 1 above.

2.7

Aggrieved appellant has filed this appeal.

3.1

We have heard Shri N.D. George, Advocate for the

appellant and Shri S.K. Hatangadi, Assistant Commissioner,

Authorised Representative for the Revenue.

3.2

Arguing for the appellant, learned counsel submits that:-

The case against the importer was with regard to the

importation of certain goods which were concealed along

with the declared goods. The case thus was illegal

importation of certain goods which was never in their

knowledge.

C/85930/2022

4

The Joint Commissioner while adjudicating the show cause

notice in which th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top