9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (1) TMI 534 - AT - CustomsLevy of penalty of 50,000/- each on Shri Harendra M Karia and M/s Asia Shipping - proceedings initiated under CBLR for revocation of license - Regulation 18 of Customs Broker Licensing Regulation - HELD THAT - The appeals filed by Shri Harendra M Karia and M/s Asia Shipping relate to the imposition of penalty of Rs. 50,000/- on each of them. The Commissioner has admitted that it was a procedural lapse. Shri Harendra M Karia and M/s Asia Shipping had acted bona fide by applying for substitution and thereafter it was the responsibility of Revenue to allow the substitute in the license of M/s Asia Shipping. Having failed to do so, it was a fault of Revenue and not that of the appellants. In these circumstances, the imposition of penalty under Regulation 18 even though there was technical violation is not justified. The penalties imposed against Shri Harendra M Karia and M/s Asia Shipping is set aside and appeals are allowed.
Issues involved:
Appeal against imposition of penalty of Rs. 50,000 under Regulation 18 of Customs Broker Licensing Regulation (CBLR). Summary: The appeals were filed against the penalty imposed on M/s. Asia Shipping Services and Shri Harendra M Karia. It was argued that though the proceedings for revocation of license were dropped, the penalty was still imposed. The individuals were qualified under the relevant regulations and had applied for licenses accordingly. However, due to procedural lapses and confusion, two licenses were obtained for the same individual. The Commissioner decided not to revoke the licenses but imposed the penalty. The Revenue filed an appeal against dropping the charges, but it was dismissed as there was no provision for such appeal. The penalties were set aside as the appellants had acted bona fide and the fault was attributed to the Revenue for not allowing the substitution in the license of M/s Asia Shipping. Detailed Judgment: Issue 1: Qualification and License Application Shri Harendra M Karia and M/s Asia Shipping Services were qualified under the relevant regulations and had applied for licenses. The application included declarations regarding the engagement in Customs House Agent work. Despite qualifications and applications, confusion led to the issuance of two licenses for the same individual. Issue 2: Procedural Lapses and Confusion Due to failure in completing formalities for substitution of names in licenses and confusion regarding qualifications, two licenses were obtained for Shri Harendra M Karia. The Commissioner decided not to revoke the licenses but imposed a penalty of Rs. 50,000 each. Issue 3: Appeal by Revenue The Revenue filed an appeal against the dropping of charges on revocation of license, but it was dismissed as there was no provision for such appeal under the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations. The Tribunal upheld the decision citing the lack of authority for Revenue to file an appeal. Issue 4: Imposition of Penalty The penalties imposed on Shri Harendra M Karia and M/s Asia Shipping were set aside as they had acted bona fide, and the fault was attributed to the Revenue for not allowing the substitution in the license of M/s Asia Shipping. The Commissioner admitted it was a procedural lapse, and the penalties were deemed unjustified. In conclusion, the appeals against the penalties imposed under Regulation 18 were allowed, and the penalties of Rs. 50,000 on each appellant were set aside. The judgment highlighted the procedural lapses, confusion, and the responsibility of the Revenue in allowing substitutions in licenses.
|
