9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (5) TMI 1050X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the case are that SIIB (import) Air Cargo Complex, have conducted an investigation into imports made by M/s. Akash Corporation and M/s. Sugam Auto India, who have engaged the appellant as a custom broker. Revenue was of the opinion that the appellant did not follow the procedure for examination of Cargo for Clearance and they did not verify the credentials of the importers. Shri Peter Pereira in his statement accepted that he was the only G category card holder and all other staffs work on the basis of daily passes and that he allowed daily pass holder to handle import documents before the Customs. Proprietor of M/s Sugam Auto India stated that he did not make any imports though 23 bills of entry were filed in the name of his company; h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the fact that the premises were indeed let out to Aksh Corporation and after 3 months the firm left the premises; that the Police investigation on the complain filed by M/s. Sugam Auto has stopped. He relies on the Final Order No. 50002/2022 dated 03.01.2022. 4. Learned authorize representative for the Revenue reiterates the findings of the impugned order and submits that the appellant-Custom Broker is a habitual offender; the enquiry report substantiates all the charges; the proprietor of the appellant confessed that none of his staff who handled the import documents has customs pass; he has failed to verify the functioning of Ms. Akash Corporation from the declared address; the CB was not aware who the actual importer was. He submits t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orized members to attend the document relating to customs clearance. The appellants claim that one importer has given a blank authorization while the other has given a power of attorney. We find that the appellants submit that the premises of M/s. Akash Corporation were used by them and that the complaint filed by M/s. Sugam Auto is not enquired into. We find that the appellant have not based their argument on as to how they have conformed to the KYC norms while interacting with their customers. They have not submitted any independent reliable documents to prove the genuineness of the where about of the clients. It is not their claim that they have produce so and so documents to defend their position. We find that the appellants have also n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... another case the custom broker was found to have filed documents in the name of another IEC holder without his knowledge in an unauthorized manner; the security deposit of the appellant was forfeited. Though, it is not fare to judge the appellant-Customs Broker on the basis of their previous records, it certainly gives an insight about the nature of the activities indulged in by the appellant-Customs Broker. As per our discussion above, we find that even in the impugned case, appellant-Customs Broker did not prove his bona fides. We find that Learned Commissioner while passing the impugned order has considered all the facts including the punishment suffer by the appellant and let them off with penalty and forfeiture of security deposit. We ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
