Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2022 (8) TMI 333

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... No.R-07/DEL/CUS/2016 valid up to 14.10.2025 (issued by Commissioner of Customs (General), New Delhi), having their office at J- 6/135, 2nd Floor, Rajouri Garden, New Delhi-110 027 and also at 1st Floor, Ashoka Complex, near Mafco Market, Sector-18, Sanapda, Navi Mumbai-400 705 (hereinafter referred to as "the appellant"). 3. That the appellant was issued a show cause notice ("SCN" in short) No.14/MK/Policy/2020 dated 01.06.2020 by the Commissioner of Customs (Airport & General), New Customs House, New Delhi, containing therein facts & allegations as communicated from the Joint Commissioner of Customs, CBS, New Customs House, Mumbai-I, asking the appellant to show cause as to why:- (i) The appellant should not be held responsible for cont .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ST refund claim of Rs.12.49 crore (Rs.8.85 crore already sanctioned as on 20.02.2019), drawback claim of Rs.1.58 crore and MEIS involved Rs.5.63 crore were filed in JNCH by exporter, M/s. Ronera Overseas Private Limited during 29.12.2018 to 15.02.2019 for exports. 5. The exporter in all the disputed exports was M/s. Ronera Overseas Pvt. Ltd. and its Customs Broker (CHA) was M/s. Glowstar International Ltd., in all the shipping bills i.e. in all the 6 SBs which were put on hold by Mumbai Customs as well in all past 85 SBs retrieved from systems. In none of the said SBs, the appellant was CHA of the said exporter. However, the Principal Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai Customs Zone-I withdrew permission granted to the appellant to transact CB .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... BLR, 2018 imposes obligation on the Customs Broker (CHA) who was appointed by the exporter for export of his goods and all those obligations are to be complied by the said CHA. Since in the instant case, the exporter in all the disputed exports is M/s. Ronera Overseas Pvt. Ltd. and their CHA is M/s. Glowstar International Ltd. in all the Shipping Bills which were filed by the aforesaid CHA, and in none of such Shipping Bill the appellant is CHA of the said exporter, therefore, there is no obligation under Regulations 10(a, 10(b), 10(d), 10(e), 10(m) and 10(n) of CBLR, 2018 was to be complied by the appellant and violation of the same by the appellant has no basis in law. The appellant also made additional written submissions in hearing befo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... hich comes out from the instant case as true is that the present CB M/s. Maj Shipping Private Limited was not any Customs Broker appointed by the exporter M/s. Ronera Overseas Pvt. Ltd. Once it is found that the CB M/s. Maj Shipping Private Limited was not the Customs Broker of the aforesaid exporter, the said CB cannot be said to owe any of obligations imposed under Regulation 10 of the CBLE, 2018 to be complied by such CB. 21.5 I, however, find that the exports in question were being made of goods at 'highly inflated value' by mis declaring description & CTH for 'claiming ineligible IGST refund, drawback & MEIS benefit' on FOB value by an exporter, M/s. Ronera Overseas Pvt. Ltd. through a Customs Broker named M/s. Glowstar International .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... any adverse view or imposition of penalty. Accordingly, prays for allowing their appeal with consequential benefits. 10. Ld. Authorised Representative for the respondent relies on the impugned order. 11. Having considered the rival contentions, I find that the ld. Commissioner has recorded the categorical findings exonerating the appellant from all the allegations made in the show cause notice. Further, the ld. Commissioner has also revoked the suspension of the appellant, which had been issued earlier. I further find that there is no allegation of any mis-chief either by the appellant or by its staff-H Card holder. I further hold that simply assisting the customs as a witnesses or otherwise in the examination of the goods does not amount .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates