9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (8) TMI 272X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cumstances which may prevail and as contemplated under Regulation 16 (2). Merely because the suspension of that license was revoked, the same would not interdict the conclusion of the inquiry for imposition of penalty as contemplated in terms of Regulation 17. There are no ground to interfere with the view as expressed by CESTAT - appeal dismissed. - HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVINDER DUDEJA For the Appellant Through: Dr. Ashutosh, Mr. J.B. Sharma Mr. Dharambir Singh, Advs. For the Respondent Through: Ms. Arunima Dwivedi, SSC along with Ms. Pinky Pawar and Mr. Aakash Pathak, Advs. ORDER PER 1. This appeal under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962 [ Act ] questions the correctness of the decision r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lly. We do not find any substance in the submission as the records show that sufficient opportunity has been granted to the appellant at all the stages and he has submitted detailed representation dated 22.02.2017 and response dated 28.04.2019 to the show cause notice and submitted reply dated 4.07.2019 to the Inquiry Report and has been granted personal hearing. The Adjudicating Authority had considered the statements of the employee of the Customs Broker and also of Shri Prashav Himanshu Shah, Proprietor of M/s. Pacific Imports, whereby the compliance of the Regulations had been appreciated. We are of the opinion that in the proceedings conducted under the Regulations the principles of natural justice have been followed and the findings a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... her action is maintainable. Under the Regulations, the immediate action required in such like cases is to pass a suspension order to restrain the Customs broker to act any further on the basis of the license. It is thereafter that the Regulation provides for detailed investigation, by holding an enquiry and then proceed further as provided therein. 8. In the present case, the Inquiry Officer considered the statements recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act of Shri Prashv Himanshu Shah, proprietor of M/s Pacific Imports, Shri Mehul Shah, Shri Ketur Bhavsar and Shri Shashikant Maruti Pol, employee of the appellant in the light of the various provisions of the Regulations which were alleged to have been violated by the appellant and foun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as a deterrent to the appellant to be more cautious and diligent in executing his work. 5. As is manifest from the above, the CESTAT found that the Commissioner had taken a balanced view in the matter and desisted from proceeding to revoke the license of the appellant which otherwise would have been warranted. It appears that in order to balance the equities, the Commissioner ultimately came to the conclusion that a forfeiture of the security deposit and the imposition of a penalty of INR 50,000/- would suffice. 6. In our considered opinion, the mere fact that the suspension of license had come to be revoked, cannot possibly be viewed as restricting the respondents from proceeding further in accordance with Regulation 17. As is manifest fr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
