9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 1069X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ods as plastic and glass cutlery items, plastic ring, small plastic bullet pendant and big plastic bullet pendant. On examination of the goods, it was found that apart from glass items, fireworks were also there. The consignment was cleared by the appellant therefore on the basis of the report of DRI of September, 2009 the CHA licence of the appellant was suspended in September, 2009 and thereafter post decisional hearing was given and order was confirmed by the order of December, 2009. Thereafter proceedings under Regulation 22 were initiated against the appellant by appointing enquiry officer on 30-4-2010. The enquiry officer submitted report on 29-3-2012. Thereafter, the CHA licence was revoked on 4-7-2012. Aggrieved from the said order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by this Tribunal in the case of P.P. Dutta - 2001 (136) E.L.T. 1042 as the appellant were having authorisation from the importer the charges of violation of Regulation 13(a) is not sustainable. He further submits that as charge of Regulation 13(a) is not sustainable, therefore the charge under Regulation 13(d) is not sustainable as there is no discrepancy found in the documents filed by the appellant on behalf of the importer. It is only at the time of examination of goods it was found that apart from the items mentioned in the bill of entry, some fireworks were also found which is prohibited for importation. Therefore relying on K.S. Sawant & Co. - 2012 (284) E.L.T. 363 the charge proved against the appellant under Regulation 13(d) is also ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h sides. Considered the submissions. 6. In this case M/s. Raju Doshi (HUF) is a IEC holder who let the IEC to Shri Abdul Rahim, importer for importation of the goods. But in the invoice as well as import documents, M/s. Raju Doshi (HUF) is shown as the importer and from the importer M/s. Raju Doshi (HUF) the appellant has obtained proper authorisation as required under Regulation 13(a) of the CHALR, 2004. As held by the Tribunal in P.P. Dutta (supra) that at the time of clearance if the authorisation is not asked by the customs officer and bills of entry has been duly signed by the appellant same is implied that the appellant has obtained authorisation from the importer. Therefore we hold that the charge levelled against the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
