9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2025 (1) TMI 88 - AT - CustomsRevocation of customs broker license - forefeiture of security deposit - levy of penalty - submission of forged graduation degree, at the time of applying for grant of the license, had submitted a forged graduation degree. Raj Kumar was, accordingly, asked to submit attested copy of the graduation degree and Raj Kumar did submit a self-attested copy of the graduation degree. Forged degree or not - HELD THAT - On a complaint received by the department, a query was made by the department from the Chaudhary Charan Singh University, Meerut regarding the genuineness of the graduate degree which the appellant had submitted to the department at the time of seeking appointment as a Customs Broker. The University, in no uncertain terms, informed the department that the details given in the graduate degree were not as per the University enrollment records or the confidential records. At the instance of the appellant the University again sought confirmation of the earlier report sent by the University and the University again informed the department that the earlier information given by the University was correct. The appellant has not produced any document from the University to substantiate that the graduate degrees submitted by the appellant is a genuine degree and only a bald assertion has been made by the appellant that the graduate degree submitted by the appellant is not forged. The finding recorded by the Commissioner that the graduate degree submitted by the appellant is a forged degree, therefore, does not suffer from any infirmity. Effect of such a forged graduate degree on the Customs Broker License issued to the appellant - HELD THAT - Once it is found that the graduation degree obtained by the appellant is a forged degree, the appellant clearly did not satisfy the essential requirement contained in clause 5(f) of the 2013 Regulations for appointment as a Customs Broker. The 2018 Regulations came into effect from 14.05.2018. When the complaint was received by the department against the appellant regarding the graduation degree, the 2018 Regulations had come into force. These Regulations supersede the 2013 Regulations, except as respect things done or omitted to be done before such supersession. Under regulation 1(3) of the 2018 Regulations, the 2018 Regulations shall apply to a Customs Broker who had been licensed either under the 2018 Regulations or under the earlier 2013 Regulations. Regulation 14 of the 2018 Regulations deals with revocation of license. It is in accordance with regulation 17 of the 2018 Regulations that a show cause notice was issued to the appellant and action was taken after the appellant was provided adequate opportunity by the enquiry officer and after the appellant was provided an opportunity to submit comments to the report submitted by the enquiry officer. Whether an applicant who had submitted a forged graduation degree, which degree is an essential requirement for appointment as a Customs Broker, can be permitted to continue as a Customs Broker? - HELD THAT - In M/S INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. VERSUS SHRI RAJENDRA D. HARMALKAR 2022 (4) TMI 1423 - SUPREME COURT the Supreme Court observed that an employee who has produced a fake and forged mark sheet at the initial stage of appointment cannot be trusted by the employer. A person who has a submitted a forged graduation degree to seek appointment as a Customs Broker, therefore, should not be permitted to work as a Customs Broker - Fraud is an act of deliberate deception with a design to secure something, which is otherwise not due. The expression fraud involves two elements, deceit and injury to the person deceived. It is a cheating intended to get an advantage. Dishonesty should not be permitted to bear the fruit and benefit to the persons who played fraud or made misrepresentation and in such circumstances Courts should not perpetuate the fraud. In UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD VERSUS RAJENDRA SINGH ORS, 2000 (3) TMI 1077 - SUPREME COURT , the Supreme Court again observed that fraud and justice never dwell together (fraus et jus nunquam cohabitant) and it is a pristine maxim which has never lost its temper over all these centuries. Conclusion - The inevitable conclusion, therefore, that follows from the aforesaid discussion and the decisions is that the appellant who had been granted a Customs Broker License on the basis of a forged graduation degree cannot be permitted to continue to work as a Customs Broker - The submission of the learned counsel for the appellant that action could have been taken only under the 2013 Regulations and not under the 2018 Regulations cannot also be accepted. There is, therefore, no infirmity in the order dated 01.07.2020 passed by the Commissioner revoking the Customs Broker License of the appellant and forfeiture of the security deposit and also imposing penalty of Rs. 50,000/- on the appellant - appeal dismissed.
Issues Involved:
1. Whether the graduation degree submitted by the appellant was forged. 2. Whether the appellant met the qualifications required under the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations 2013 and 2018. 3. Whether the revocation of the Customs Broker License under the 2018 Regulations was justified. 4. Whether the appellant's contention that the burden of proof was on the department was valid. 5. Whether the penalty and forfeiture of the security deposit were justified. Detailed Analysis: 1. Forged Graduation Degree: The primary issue was whether the graduation degree submitted by the appellant was forged. The department received a complaint and sought verification from Chaudhary Charan Singh University, Meerut. The University confirmed that the details in the degree did not match their enrollment and confidential records. The appellant failed to produce any document from the University to substantiate the authenticity of the degree. The Tribunal concluded that the degree was indeed forged, and this finding did not suffer from any infirmity. 2. Qualifications Under the Regulations: According to Regulation 5(f) of the 2013 Regulations, an applicant for a Customs Broker License must be a graduate from a recognized University and possess a professional degree such as an MBA. The Tribunal noted that the appellant submitted a forged graduation degree, thus failing to meet the essential qualification requirements. The appellant's argument that his MBA degree should suffice was dismissed, as both qualifications were mandatory. 3. Revocation Under the 2018 Regulations: The appellant contended that the revocation should have been under the 2013 Regulations, not the 2018 Regulations. However, the Tribunal clarified that the 2018 Regulations, which were in force when the complaint was received, applied to the appellant. The 2018 Regulations superseded the 2013 Regulations, and the action taken under them was deemed appropriate. 4. Burden of Proof: The appellant argued that the burden of proof was on the department to demonstrate that the degree was forged. The Tribunal rejected this argument, stating that the University had already confirmed the degree's inauthenticity. The appellant's failure to provide evidence to the contrary meant the department had sufficiently discharged its burden. 5. Penalty and Forfeiture of Security Deposit: The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's decision to revoke the license, forfeit the security deposit, and impose a penalty of Rs. 50,000. It emphasized that the appellant's fraudulent actions disqualified him from holding a Customs Broker License. The Tribunal cited various precedents underscoring that fraud and misrepresentation cannot be condoned, and individuals who engage in such conduct should not benefit from their deceit. In conclusion, the Tribunal found no merit in the appellant's claims and dismissed the appeal, affirming the revocation of the license and the associated penalties.
|
