9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (6) TMI 1120X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tributable on part of the appellant attributable to them as their role and responsibilities of a customs broker. It is duly recorded by the Commissioner that the customs broker had requested for second appraisement of the subject bills of entry by way of examination of the goods. While the department choose to enhance the value of the imported goods, no change to the classification of the goods under import was carried out. Under the circumstances, it is most improper to allude any misdemeanor on the part of the customs, broker or to hold them responsible for any misdeclaration, when they have themselves solicited first check examination of import cargo. The order records that the custom broker had also called for the previous Bills of Entr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... they had filed below two Bills of Entry for import of goods for M/s.Woodstock Mumbai. They submit that DRI Mumbai issued a show cause notice, alleging amongst others aiding and abetting on the part of the appellant in mis-classification of the goods rendering the same liable for confiscation under section 111 (m) of the Customs Act, 1962. Subsequently, a notice dated 11.08.2017 was issued to them in terms of regulation 23 of the CBLR 2013 for immediate prohibition of their Customs Brokers License. The prohibition order dated 10.11.2017 was issued by the Principal Commissioner of Customs, General New Custom House, Mumbai under Regulation 20(1) off the CBLR, 2013 asking them as to why the Custom Broker license issued to them, should not be re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... made by the appellant and thereafter pass a fresh order. In the meantime, the prohibition from working in Mumbai Zone I, II and III is revoked. 5. We have heard Shri P.R. Chowdhury, Ld.Consultant for the appellant and Shri T.Suleman, Ld.Authorized Representative for the department in the matter. In view of the categorical finding recorded by the Ld. Commissioner of Customs referred to supra, we note that no case of imposition of penalty subsists in the matter as there is nothing to impute any misdemeanour, commission, or omission of an act clearly attributable on part of the appellant attributable to them as their role and responsibilities of a customs broker. It is duly recorded by the Commissioner that the customs broker had requested for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
