9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 88X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icensing Regulations 2013 [the 2013 Regulations]. It was granted a license on 28.10.2016 for the period upto 21.09.2026. On 08.08.2019, a complaint was received by the department that Raj Kumar, at the time of applying for grant of the license, had submitted a forged graduation degree. Raj Kumar was, accordingly, asked to submit attested copy of the graduation degree and Raj Kumar did submit a self-attested copy of the graduation degree. The department, thereafter, sent a letter dated 21.08.2019 to the Vice Chancellor of the Chaudhary Charan Singh University, Meerut, from which University the said graduation degree is said to have been obtained, to verify the genuineness and authenticity of the degree and the mark sheets submitted by the Raj Kumar. The Registrar of the University, by a letter dated 05.10.2019, informed the department that the details given in the degree and the mark sheets were not as per the enrolment and confidential records of the University. 3. Accordingly, a show cause notice dated 27.12.2019 was issued to the appellant mentioning therein that as the graduate degree submitted by Raj Kumar was informed by the University to be forged, he is not eligible to hol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , called upon to show cause as to why: "9. Now, in view of the above, xxxxxxxxx, M/s R.K. Logistics, xxxxxxxxxxx, is hereby called upon to show cause to the Commissioner of Customs (Airport & General), New Custom House, New Delhi xxxxxxxxx: a. He should not be held responsible for contravention of various provisions of Regulations Regulations 5(h)(i) and Regulation 5(h)(ii) of CBLR 2018 {read with erstwhile regulation 5(f)(i) and 5(f)(ii) of CBLR 2013) and violation of Section 132 of Customs Act 1962. b. Their CB license should not be revoked and part or whole of the security submitted at the time of issue of their license, should not be forfeited from them in terms of Regulation 14 read with Regulation 17 of CBLR, 2018 (read with Regulation 18 and 20 of erstwhile CBLR 2013} for failure to comply with the provisions of Regulation Regulations 5(h)(i) and Regulation 5(h)(ii) of CBLR 2018 {read with erstwhile regulation 5(f)(i) and 5(f)(ii) of CBLR 2013}. c. Penalty should not be imposed on them in terms of Regulation 18 read with Regulation 17 of CBLR, 2018{read with Regulation 18 and 20 of erstwhile CBLR 2013}. d. Action should not be initiated and penalty should not b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the appellant was forfeited and a penalty of Rs. 50,000/- was also imposed upon the appellant under regulation 18 of the 2018 Regulations. 7. It is this order dated 01.07.2020 of the Commissioner that has been assailed in this appeal. 8. Shri Mukesh Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that: (i) The University never intimated the department that the graduation degree submitted by the appellant was forged since all that was intimated by the University was that the degree and the mark sheets were not as per the University enrollment and confidential record; (ii) All the academic records of the appellant were verified by the department before granting the Customs Broker License to the appellant and so the department cannot now contend that the graduation degree submitted by the appellant was forged; (iii) The burden of proof was on the department to prove that the graduation degree submitted by the appellant was forged but the department failed to discharge this burden; (iv) Even if it is held that the graduation degree submitted by the appellant was forged, then too the appellant had submitted the Masters of Business Administration Degree, which degre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... egree submitted by the appellant was forged; and (v) The appellant has not obtained any document from the University, which may substantiate that the graduation degree submitted by the appellant with the application form was a genuine degree. 10. The submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned authorized representative appearing for the department have been considered. 11. To appreciate the contentions that have been advanced, it would be useful to reproduce the relevant portions of the 2013 Regulations and the 2018 Regulations: 2013 REGULATIONS "3. Customs Brokers to be licensed. - No person shall carry on business as a Customs Broker relating to the entry or departure of a conveyance or the import or export of goods at any Customs Station unless such person holds a licence granted under these regulations: xxxxxxxxxxxx 5. Conditions to be fulfilled by the applicants.- The applicant for a licence to act as a Customs Broker in a Customs Station, shall prove to the satisfaction of the Commissioner of Customs, that: (a) xxxxxxxxx (b) xxxxxxxxx (c) xxxxxxxxx (d) xxxxxxxxx (e) xxxxxxxxx (f) an individual applicant or i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gulations or the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 1984 or the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 2004 or the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013. xxxxxxxxxx 14. Revocation of Licence or Impositions of penalty The Principal Commissioner or Commissioner of Customs may, subject to the provisions of regulation 17, revoke the license of a Customs Broker and order for forfeiture of part or whole of security, on any of the following, namely:- (a) xxxxxxxxxx; (b) failure to comply with any of the provisions of these regulations, within his jurisdiction or anywhere else; (C-f) xxxxxxxx" 12. The appellant had submitted an application for grant of a Customs Broker License in 2016 when the 2013 Regulations were in force. Regulation 3 of the 2013 Regulations provides that no person shall carry on business as a Customs Broker at any Customs Station unless such a person holds a license granted under the 2013 Regulations. Regulation 4 requires inviting of applications and for conducting of examinations for grant of a license to act as a Customs Broker. Regulation 5 deals with the conditions to be fulfilled by the applicants. Sub-clause (f) of regulat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... b) a license can be revoked on the ground that the appellant failed to comply with any of the provisions of the Regulations. Regulations 20 deals with the procedure for revoking the license or imposing penalty. 17. The 2018 Regulations came into effect from 14.05.2018. When the complaint was received by the department against the appellant regarding the graduation degree, the 2018 Regulations had come into force. These Regulations supersede the 2013 Regulations, except as respect things done or omitted to be done before such supersession. Under regulation 1(3) of the 2018 Regulations, the 2018 Regulations shall apply to a Customs Broker who had been licensed either under the 2018 Regulations or under the earlier 2013 Regulations. Regulation 14 of the 2018 Regulations deals with revocation of license. It is in accordance with regulation 17 of the 2018 Regulations that a show cause notice was issued to the appellant and action was taken after the appellant was provided adequate opportunity by the enquiry officer and after the appellant was provided an opportunity to submit comments to the report submitted by the enquiry officer. 18. The issue that arises for consideration in this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oyer? Whether such a certificate was material or not and/or had any bearing on the employment or not is immaterial. The question is not of having an intention or mens rea. The question is producing the face/forged certificate. Therefore, in our view, the Disciplinary Authority was justified in imposing the punishment of dismissal from service." (emphasis supplied) 22. A person who has a submitted a forged graduation degree to seek appointment as a Customs Broker, therefore, should not be permitted to work as a Customs Broker. 23. Fraud is an act of deliberate deception with a design to secure something, which is otherwise not due. The expression "fraud" involves two elements, deceit and injury to the person deceived. It is a cheating intended to get an advantage. Dishonesty should not be permitted to bear the fruit and benefit to the persons who played fraud or made misrepresentation and in such circumstances Courts should not perpetuate the fraud. 24. In this connection, it needs to be remembered what was observed by the Supreme Court in Shrisht Dhawan vs. Shaw Bros [(1992) 1 SCC 534] that "fraud and collusion vitiate even the most solemn proceedings in any civilised sy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent and to show-cause. None of them could establish the genuineness or legality of their appointment before the State Committee. The State Committee on appreciation of the materials on record has opined that their appointment was illegal and void ab initio. We do not find any ground to disagree with the finding of the State Committee." (emphasis supplied) 28. In State of U.P. vs. Neeraj Awasthi & others, JT [2006 (1) SC 19], the Supreme Court held that discontinuation of services of a person who lacked the basic qualifications and, therefore, could not have been appointed nor continued would not be a punitive measure because they were discontinued for the reason that they were not qualified and did not possess the requisite qualifications for appointment. 29. The inevitable conclusion, therefore, that follows from the aforesaid discussion and the decisions is that the appellant who had been granted a Customs Broker License on the basis of a forged graduation degree cannot be permitted to continue to work as a Customs Broker. 30. The contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that the University had not informed the department that the graduation degree submitted t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
