9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 898X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the post import conditions of the Exemption Notification against which the consignment was cleared since no such authority has been bestowed on the appellant. Thus, the Appellant cannot be held responsible for the violation, if any, committed by the importer. Attention drawn to Tribunal s decision in the case of MR. G.N.D. CARGO MOVERS VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (GENERAL) , NEW DELHI [ 2017 (4) TMI 1160 - CESTAT NEW DELHI ] wherein it has been held that the requirement of Customs Broker to exercise due diligence to ascertain the correctness of any information which he imparts to clients with reference to work relating to clearance of cargo would arise only when the Customs Broker is aware of the importer s motive to mis-declare. In that case in each and every case of mis-declaration by the exporter, it can be concluded that Customs Broker did not suitably inform his clients. There has to be some evidence on record to show that either the Customs Broker was aware of such misdeclaration and suppressed the same with a mala fide mind or he has taken efforts to get the goods cleared from the Customs on the basis of wrong declaration made by him or has connived with the importer so ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssment of consignment vide Bill of Entry No.5656471 dated 16.06.2016 under Notification No.153/94- Cus, against re- export Bond, which was accordingly assessed and cleared. The competent authority of FSSAI granted clearance of the import consignment subject to the conditions that the full quantity of import goods was to be exported back and no portion thereof was to be loaned, sold transferred and otherwise disposed of for home consumption. 3. During the period October, 2016 to June, 2017, nine more consignments of "Food Supplements" were imported by M/s. Exim International, Kolkata from Dubai. Tapas, on instruction from the importer filed nine Bills of Entry for clearance of the aforesaid nine consignment of "Food Supplements" claiming exemption under Notification No.32/97-Cus. against "jobbing-cum-export" Bonds and Bank Guarantees executed by the importer. Out of the nine consignments, eight consignments of "Food Supplements" were assessed and allowed clearance by the Customs Authorities extending the exemption benefit under Notification No.32/97-Cus with full duty concessions against "jobbing-cum-export" Bonds and Bank Guarantee for the differential duty amount. The last consig ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... obbing -cum-export" Bonds and Bank Guarantee. The Bill of Entry No. 2001938 dated 07.06.2017 was filed for clearance of the 10th Consignment claiming exemption benefit vide Notification No.32/97-Cus. which was intercepted by DRI resulting in the impugned proceedings. All these assessments were conditional assessment under Section 143 of the Customs Act, 1962 for which the proper officer was the Assistant/ Deputy Commissioner concerned. The acceptance of the claim of assessment against certain conditional Exemption Notification and the acceptance of Bond and Bank Guarantee in this regard submitted by the importer was the exclusive responsibility of the DC concerned as the Proper Officer and as a Customs Broker, the appellant had neither any jurisdiction nor any say in this regard. (iv) The Appellant had limited role of filing the bills of entry as per the instructions of importer and the authority of deciding the admissibility of any Exemption Notification was exclusively bestowed on Assistant/ Deputy Commissioner concerned as the Proper Officer under Section 143 of the Customs Act, 1962. (v) In case of any violation of terms and conditions of the Exemption Notification by the i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Exemption Notification by the importer, invocation of the terms and the conditions of Bond including that of re-export Bond is the exclusive liability of the Departmental Officer and in no way the responsibility can be shifted to the Customers Broker. The appellant as the customs broker at no stretch of imagination can be held liable for violation for the post import conditions of the Exemption Notification against which the consignment was cleared since no such authority has been bestowed on the appellant. Thus, we hold that the Appellant cannot be held responsible for the violation, if any, committed by the importer. 10. The Appellant drawn our attention to the Tribunal's decision in the case of GND Cargo Movers reported in 2017 (357) ELT 1184 (Trib- Delhi) wherein it has been held that the requirement of Customs Broker to exercise due diligence to ascertain the correctness of any information which he imparts to clients with reference to work relating to clearance of cargo would arise only when the Customs Broker is aware of the importer's motive to mis-declare. In that case in each and every case of mis-declaration by the exporter, it can be concluded that Customs Broker did ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
