9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (5) TMI 77X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lf of principal, (importer/exporter), the absence of mens-rea, penalty is not imposable, otherwise all the customs transaction will come to halt, if penalty is imposed on the customs broker the omission /commission of exporter/importer. Moreover, in the impugned order Adjudication Authority itself held that there is no illegality revealed related to goods cleared through the appellant. Appellant has not received any authorization for filing the courier bills of entry. However, while submitting reply to show cause notice, appellant submits that the importer is identified and appellant had caried out KYC verification such as IEC and GST registration as per information provided by Mr. Ajit. Moreover, the appellant produced Email communication ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... egulations, 2010 is also set aside. - Hon'ble Mr. P. A. Augustian , Member ( Judicial ) And Hon'ble Mr. Pullela Nageswara Rao , Member ( Technical ) Mr. G. B. Eshwarappa Advocate for the Appellant Mr. Rajesh Shastry , Authorised Representative for Respondent ORDER Per : P.A. Augustian : M/s. Orbit Trans Express Freight Pvt. Ltd., appellant is an authorized courier agent holding Courier License issued by Airport and Air Cargo Commissionerate, Bengaluru. Alleging that the appellant had abetted M/s. KT Technologies, New Delhi to import goods through Bengaluru Airport by mis-eclaring the value, proceedings were initiated and adjudication authority as per impugned order revoked the license, enforced the Bond and Bank guarantee. In addi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ority, held that unfortunately, the investigation could not find out any under valuation or misdeclaration related to the 6(six) CBEs. The Learned Counsel further reiterated in the grounds of appeal and submits that the proceedings against the appellant is illegal and unsustainable. Learned counsel also relied on the following decisions in support of their submission. 1) Fle Fast Line Express Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CC 2021(378) E.L.T. 361 (Tri.-Del.) 2) Fastline India Vs. CC, New Delhi -2018 (363) E.L.T. 1011 (Tri.-Del.) 3) H.B. Cargo Services Vs. CC, Hyderabad -2010(261) E.L.T. 540 (Tri.- Bang.) 4) Manjunatha Cargo Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CC, Bangalore. -2021(375) E.L.T.245 (Tri.-Bang.) 3. The Learned Authorised Representative (AR) for Revenue reiterated the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rt goods, as is required under Regulation 8 or Regulation 19 of the Customs brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013 and not duly authorized under Section 146 of Customs Act, 1962. Thus, appellant has contravened the provisions of Regulation 12(ii) of Courier Imports and Exports (Electronic Declaration and Processing) Regulations, 2010. 4. Heard both sides and perused the records. 5. We find that as regards penalty on the appellant under Section 117 of the Customs Act, 1962, it can be invoked only where no express penalty is elsewhere provided for such contravention or failure. However, in the present proceedings penalty is proposed by invoking penal provisions under Regulation 14 of the Courier Import and Export (Electronic Declaration and proc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al Thakur, proprietress M/s K T Technologies vide her letter dated 02.12.2021 claimed the ownership of the goods seized and requested to release the shipment. It may be noted that inspite of giving such finding, adjudication authority accepted the request of Ms. Kajal Thakur made vide letter dated 02.12.2021 and 03.01.2022 and released the goods on payment of duty and penalty on 11.01.2022. Thus, the allegation regarding fraud on the Government using a dummy and bogus importer is unsustainable. Regarding violation of the Regulation 12(i) of the Courier Imports and Exports (Electronic Declaration and Processing) Regulations, 2010, said allegation is made on the ground that the appellant has not received any authorization for filing the couri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ependent document. Considering the finding in ibid paras, customs authority, who had initially made allegation that the appellant assisted Shri M. Elias to commit fraud on the Government using a dummy and bogus importer accepted the letter of the importer and released the goods after adjudication to the very same importer, cannot later turn around and conclude that the import is made in the name of a bogus importer. Moreover, even as per the allegation in the SCN, there is no import of prohibited/restricted goods and there is no allegation related to goods cleared by appellant. 9. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, appeal is allowed by setting aside revocation of courier license and enforcement of Bond and Bank guara ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
