9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (5) TMI 801X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this will not absolve the appellant of the commission of the offence, if any. There is no mention of any criminal complaint was registered against the employees of the appellant and if so, what was the outcome of the same. Though, the same is not relevant to see the veracity of the licenses, it could throw light on the mala fides of the appellant, if any. Revocation of licenses - Revenue is free to take action against the licenses which are obtained by fraud or mis-representation, such an action cannot be excessive and needs to be commensurate to the commission of offence, more so, looking into the fact that the Adjudicating Authority has allowed continuation of warehousing operations for a period of three months to enable the clearance of cargo. It is also seen that the Adjudicating Authority categorically holds that the appellants have paid the applicable dues to the Vishakhapatnam Port Authorities in respect of all the warehouses which was not disproved in the investigation. This gives an indication that the Adjudicating Authority had an idea at the back of his mind that the license can be continued notwithstanding the submission of fake/ nongenuine insurance policies in respect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction 117 of the Customs Act; the show-cause notice was adjudicated vide order dated 08.11.2023 vide which learned Principal Commissioner ordered for cancellation of warehouse licenses Nos.16/2020, 24/2018, 04/2023 and 06/2023 and imposed the penalty of Rs.75,000/- on Shri M. Venugopal, Director of the appellant (Appeal No. C/30451/2023). Hence, this appeal. 2. Shri L.V. Rao, learned Counsel for the appellant, submits that Section 58(B)(2) of the Customs Act empowers the Principal Commissioner to suspend operation of the warehouse only, during the pendency of enquiry and as such suspension of license was without authority of law; learned Adjudicating Authority erred in observing that suspension of warehouse operations and suspension of license are one and the same. Learned Counsel submits that if the Statute provides for a thing to be done in a particular manner, then it must be done in that particular manner alone; all the other methods must be deemed to have been prohibited as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Cannon India Pvt. Ltd.- 2021 (3) TMI 384 and in the case of Hussein Ghaidially- MANU/SC/0613/2014) 8 SCC 42. 3. Learned Counsel further submits that the Ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cies for license No.24/2018 was submitted; similarly, though insurance policy submitted for license No.16/2020 was found non-genuine, the company had a valid insurance for the period 27.06.2022 to 26.06.2023; the insurance policy for license No.04/2023 was found genuine and was accepted by the Adjudicating Authority; however, he proceeded to cancel the license No.04/2023; Shri U.V. Raju, in his statement dated 16.08.2023 categorically submitted that Shri Raghav Rao, Head, Port Operations of the Company was responsible for submission of insurance policies. 6. The appellant submits, therefore, that there is no provision for submission of NOC from the Port; there was a mistake on the part of the employee of the appellant in submitting not genuine/ fake insurance policies; genuine insurance policies were available for license Nos.16/2020 and 24/2018 which were also cancelled along with others by the Adjudicating Authority without going into the merits of each license; there is no provision in the Rules to suspend or cancel licenses and to impose penalty; he further submits that when a law provides for certain thing to be done in a specific manner, the same requires to be done in the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the authorities. 9. I find that in terms of Regulation 6 of Public-bonded Warehouse Regulations, 2016 read with Para 6 of the CBEC Circular No.26/2016-Cus dated 09.06.2016, the licenses granted shall remain valid till its surrender/ cancellation and there shall not be any requirement for annual renewal and as per Para 8 of the Circular, insurance policies need to be renewed annually to comply with solvency conditions. The appellants plead that in spite of the instructions as above, the authorities were renewing the licenses periodically and even if such condition is followed, genuine insurance policies are available for two licenses which were also cancelled and there was no requirement of giving an NOC from Port authorities and possession of blank Port NOC at the office of the appellant has no bearing on the licenses. The appellants, also, submits that the procedure in which the licenses were cancelled was also not as laid down in the law; the Deputy Commissioner, who has no authority, has issued the order without attaching the order of the Commissioner. 10. On going through the records of the case and rival submissions, I find that the appellants are alleged to have submitt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... license No.16/2020 was submitted during the validity and existence of genuine insurance policy whose validity is extended till 10.08.2023. Also, the submission of the appellant that they have submitted a fresh genuine insurance policy in respect of license No.24/2018, the fact of which is not disputed in the impugned order. This gives an indication that the Adjudicating Authority had an idea at the back of his mind that the license can be continued notwithstanding the submission of fake/ nongenuine insurance policies in respect of some licenses. For the same reason, it would have been in the fitness of things if the two licenses Nos.16/2020, 24/2018, for which genuine insurance policy was available, were not cancelled. Similarly, I find that the appellant's argument that mere possession of fake NOCs has no bearing on the case as the NOCs were not even required to be submitted. 12. Coming to the imposition of penalty on the Director, Shri M. Venugopal, under Section 117 of the Customs Act, 1962, the Department contends that Shri Venugopal was responsible for all the activities of the company and has given an undertaking that if any particulars declared are proved to be false, the l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
