9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 399X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - Held that:- This Court is not persuaded to exercise jurisdiction to set aside the order entirely because the role ascribed to the CB holder was one of carelessness and negligence. In this regard the Court notices that both the authorities, the Commissioner as well as the CESTAT appeared to have imposed almost impossibly high standards upon the CB holder who is expected to not only verify the co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h, Ms. Nidhi Saini and Sagar Rohatgi, Advocates, for the Respondent. ORDER This appeal by the Customs Authorities challenges an order of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), which granted partial relief to the respondent CB holder. The Revenue contends that the penalty of forfeiture was the appropriate one having regard to the totality of circumstances. 2. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed in revocation of the license and forfeiture of the security amount. The CB holder appealed to the CESTAT which held that violation of Regulation 11(a) was established as was the case with Regulation 11(d) however, on an appreciation of overall conspectus of the circumstances, the Tribunal felt that the CB holder merely accepted the information furnished to him without carrying any other verific ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... authorities were thus not afforded the option of picking up the one element from the revocation and forfeiture option and imposing penalty along with forfeiture. To that extent, the CESTAT clearly went beyond the Regulations. However, this Court is not persuaded to exercise jurisdiction to set aside the order entirely because the role ascribed to the CB holder was one of carelessness and negligenc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
