2014 (3) TMI 283

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....:- (i)     A specific intelligence was received by DRI that Shri Vishwas Tukaram Gaonkar, stated to be having office at C-215, Belapur Railway Station Complex, Sector 11, CBD Belapur, Navi Mumbai-400614, was engaged in the fraudulent export of various Ready Mede Garments (RMGs) such as - Gents' vests, trousers, t-Shirts, Bermudas, etc. (ii)   Accordingly, action was initiated and Office and residential premises of Vishwas Gaonkar as mentioned above along with his residential address was searched on 20-1-2009 and 21-1-2009. The searches resulted in recovery of large number of incriminating documents. (iii)   In his statement dated 21-1-2009, Shri Vishwas Gaonkar inter alia stated that he had c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....., CHA No. 11/654; that the proprietor of M/s. LMS Transport Co. is Shri Mahinder Sukhraj Tarneja, who has allowed him to use the CHA licence of M/s. LMS Transoprt Co. on agreed terms, i.e. Rs. 350/- per job by cheque and Rs. 1500/- by cash. (vi)   Goods namely, RMGs covered by 7 S/bills with declared FOB value of Rs. 2,92,99,232/- of M/s. Vicarious Exim and 3 S/Bills with declared FOB value of Rs. 1,05,74,113/- in name of M/s. Royal Exports which were tendered for export were detained under panchanama dated 22-5-2009; the goods were found to be misdeclared in terms of composition and quality. (vii) All these Shipping Bills were filed by Shri Christopher Lopez by using the CHA licence of M/s. LMS Transport Co. CHA No. 11/654....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....orization from the exporters, have violated the Regulation 13(a) of CHALR, 2004. 4. Heard both sides. 5. It is the contention of the learned Advocate that in the case of K.S. Sawant & Co. v. Commissioner of Customs (General), Mumbai reported in 2012 (284) E.L.T. 363 (Tri.-Mum.) wherein the Tribunal held that procurement of business through intermediary who is not his employee does not amount to sub-letting of licence or transfer of the business to intermediary. He submitted that in this case all the clearances were taken by the authorized employee of the appellant namely Shri Sandeep Sawant. Shri Christopher Lopez was bringing the business to the appellant for that they were paying certain fees to the appellant. That does no....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... and the same issue was dealt with by the Tribunal in the case of K.S. Sawant and Co. (supra) wherein it was held that- "The question is, merely because the appellant procured the business through an intermediary who is not his employee, can it be said that he has sub-let or transferred the business to intermediary, it does not amount to sub-letting of the CHA license or transfer of the business to an intermediary." In this case also, from the cross-examination, it is clear that all the shipping bills have been signed by the appellant and all the clearances were made by their employee. Therefore, the charge of violation against the Regulations 12, 13(a) and 13(b) are not sustainable. 8.2 Further, in the case of Thawerdas Wadho....