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

2024 (1) TMI 645

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... against the appellant under the provisions of Customs House Agent Licensing Regulations, 2004. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the appellant was issued a Customs House Agent License to transact customs business in the name of M/s. Tulip International. The appellant states that following prescribed procedure in law they subsequently opened an office under Regulation 9(2) at Mumbai wherein one Manish Chatwani was engaged as Manager of the said office. The appellant is said to have issued a Power of Attorney in favour Manish Chatwani consequent to setting up of their Mumbai office (licence No.11/1395). 3. The appellant contends that the Mumbai Customs authority suspended the CHA licence granted at Mumbai vide Order No.56/200 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the Kolkata licence for breach of provisions of the Customs Act and the Foreign Trade Policy, for an offence conducted at Mumbai (Nhava Sheva) was in breach of the provisions of natural justice and Kolkata authorities had no jurisdiction in the matter. We are however not impressed with these arguments of the appellant as we note that the parent licence was issued to the appellant only by the Calcutta Customs House and it was subsequently as per the provisions of Regulation 9 of the CHALR that the appellant was permitted to transact business at Mumbai for which as stated by them, the aforesaid Power of Attorney was assigned in favour of Manish Chatwani. 6. As the issue concerns various obligations cast upon the CHA in law, for the sake of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... sions of his employees in regard to their employment. 7. We have heard the two sides and perused the case records. 8. We note from the proceedings that departmental proceedings as required in terms of the provisions of law were duly carried out. The appellant were given all reasonable opportunity to defend themselves. The charge against the appellant essentially concerns - (i) Mis-declaration of new car as old, so as to claim substantial depreciation and lower the assessable value. (ii) Mis-declaration of old car (duty @ 165%) as new car (duty @ 113%) to evade duty. (iii) Mis-declaration of the model of vehicle with a view to import high end vehicles in the guise of low end vehicles e.g. Land Rover L 322 model 4.0 litre V8 Petrol de .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 0. In the backdrop of the aforesaid factual position, we find that the appellant is undoubtedly guilty of the offences as made out against him. Thus, it goes without any effort to point out that violation of Regulation 12 (transferability of licence) is clearly evident. It has been brought on record that Manish Chatwani had paid an amount of Rs.2.00 Lakh to the appellant as precautionary money besides making monthly payments of Rs.20,000/- for utilization of their said licence. The fact that a monthly consideration, irrespective of the volume of business is the determining remuneration, leaves nothing more to imagination, but for transferring or sub-letting of the CHA license. This therefore establishes the lending of the licences for a con .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d referred to in earlier paras establishes the fact of lack of any consideration for exercise of due diligence in the matter. We also note that Regulation 19(8) of CHALR is also violated in the matter, as the appellant staying in Kolkata had no control and neither exercised supervision of business being transacted in their name and their licence registered at Mumbai, enabling them to transact business at Mumbai. On the grounds aforesaid we therefore are of the view that the appellant has certainly violated and committed breach of the provisions of law, as charged with. The adjudicating authority in his findings has however noted as under, in the context of the role of Manish Chatwani and the case laws relied upon by the appellants:- "I ag .....

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