9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (5) TMI 237X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tainers in which it was to be carried at the exporter s premises at Ahmedabad. On such permission being granted, empty containers were taken from Kandla. The CHA subsequently presented the shipping bill to the Custom House accompanied by an invoice, on the reverse of which has a certificate of the Superintendent of Central Excise, Ahmedabad that the export cargo had been examined and stuffed into the containers in his (Superintendent s) presence on 11th February, 1995. The containers were opened and examined by the Customs in Kandla, in pursuance of information received. They found the PVC pipes within the containers of weigh only 949 kg found over 200 empty cartons. Goods were seized. In the course of subsequent investigation carried out b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mbalica Enterprises in return of payments prescribed by the Custom House, and allowed the unapproved persons to sign the application to remove the containers. The officer who was appointed to enquire into these charges confirmed these allegations. Accepting this report, the Commissioner, in the impugned order revocation of the CHA licence. 4. The contention before the enquiry officer by the representative of the appellant that Shailesh Varu was in fact being paid Rs. 95/- per month as salary has not been accepted on the ground that it has not been shown that these payments were reflected in the income tax returns filed by it. 5. Enqiry officer s refusal to accept that Shailesh Varu was not being paid Rs. 125/- per month as salary becaus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shailesh Varu was aware or connived with the report which the Superintendent signed without supervising the shipment. He says that he handed over the blank certificate to Vijay, Manager of Ultratex Exports. It is therefore possible to infer that Shailesh Varu would have known that the certificate was fraudulent and the cargo contained in the container was less than the declared one. There is nothing to show that he communicated this to the knowledge of the appellant. Therefore, the charges could be established only to the extent that Shailesh Varu as an employee signed the documents or was permitted by the appellant to file the shipping bill signed by the appellant. While there are no specific charge as to the last, the fact remains that S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the appellant. However, assuming that Shailesh Varu was aware or knowingly facilitated attempting to claim drawback without exporting the goods, it is not possible to hold that the appellant knew or reasons to believe that Shailesh Varu was engaged in such a course of action. None of the statements recorded or other evidence brought on record, indicates any knowledge on the part of the appellant or its proprietor of the activities of Shailesh Varu. It appears likely that the appellant has placed undue trust and confidence in Shailesh Varu. This alone, however, is not, in our view, sufficient to revoke the licence once and for all. 9. Recovation of a licence is a grave punishment, as it deprives the person concerned of the means of live ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
