TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (12) TMI 743
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(b) of the Customs Act, 1962, for the purpose of loading of export goods and unloading of imported goods vide Notification No. 02/2001-Cus (N.T) dated 19.02.2001 of Customs Commissionerate, Bangalore. In terms of the instructions contained vide Board s Circular No. 128/95 dated 14.12.1995, the then Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore had appointed M/s. CWC as custodians of imported goods at Inland Container Depot, Whitefield, Bangalore vide Notification No. 03/2001 Cus (N.T) dated 19.02.2001 in terms of Section 15 (1) of the Customs Act, 1962. This was valid for a period of five years from the date of issue. The above custodian Notification had expired w.e.f. 18.02.2006 and M/s. CWC had applied for renewal of the same vide their letter dated....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the satisfaction of the Commissioner of Customs. Commissioner of Customs shall have the right to terminate the appointment at any time after assigning specific reasons and giving opportunity for the custodian to explain his case. The appointment shall be reviewed after 5 years thereafter. 1.4. Further, as per Notification No. 03/2001-Cus. (N.T) dated 19.02.2001, vide which M/s. CWC were appointed Custodian of the above Customs Area, M/s. CWC were required to satisfy the various conditions including the conditions specified in the following paras of the Notification. (i) Para 18: In case the Custodian wants to sublet any of the functions inside the Customs Area, the same should be done with prior approval of the Commissioner of Cus....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r of Customs about the agreement. Thereafter in February 2007, the Joint Commissioner of Customs had called for explanation of the appellant vide his letter dated 02.03.2007. While the correspondence was going on regarding the Strategic Alliance Agreement, the custodian licence was renewed for further five years by the Commissioner vide Notification No. 2/2007 dated 03.05.2007. Subsequently show-cause notice was issued proposing imposition of penalty. Further he also submits that the Commissioner himself has observed in his order that the action of the appellant in entering into the Strategic Alliance without following the prescribed procedure was kind of an oversight and not with any intent to deliberate hide or have no bona fide intention....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rior approval to be taken for custodian to sublet any of the functions inside the Customs area. The learned counsel did not also dispute that the agreement amounted to subletting any of the functions. Under these circumstances, it is quite clear that the condition had been violated. Further as submitted by the learned AR, no mens rea is required for imposition of penalty under Section 117 of Customs Act 1962 and therefore, the observations of the Commissioner that there was no mala fide intention and it was basically an oversight, is not of any help to the appellant. Nevertheless, I consider that these observations are very important to determine the quantum of penalty imposable on the appellant. Section 117 of Customs Act 1962 provided for....