2015 (5) TMI 486

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dated 22.10.2013 on behalf of the importer M/s R.N. Trading for clearance of assorted soft drinks, chocolates, baked beans, vinegar, etc. The Bill of Entry was registered on 8.11.2013 and was presented for examination on 11.11.2013 by the employee of the appellant along with No Objection Certificate (NOC) from 'Food Safety & Standard Authority of India' (FSSAI in short). The Customs authorities found that the NOCs produced were forged or bogus, which was confirmed by the authorities of FSSAI by their letter dated 4.12.2013. On examination by the Customs Intelligence Unit (CIU), the goods were found to be as per declaration i.e. packing list and invoices. The goods were valued at Rs. 8,10,431/- were seized. Thereafter the importer ma....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r part. 2.3 Subsequently, after about one year, the appellant CHA has been prohibited for the alleged occurrence vide order dated 26.12.2014 under the provisions of Regulation 23 of CBLR, 2013. Thereafter, post 26.12.2014 opportunity of hearing was given, wherein taking notice of the aforementioned facts, the Commissioner of Customs (General) vide the impugned order dated 20.1.2015 have recorded the finding that the appellant is trying to disassociate himself for culpable act of authorized employee Shri Hemant K Pol, which cannot be accepted under the CBLR, 2013. It was further found that the appellant is responsible for the mischief, which occurred with respect to submission of bogus NOC for clearance of the aforementioned Bill of Entry....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ereate. It is further urged that due to the impugned order, the appellant is suffering both financially and loss of goodwill and loss of livelihood for the management and its employees. 3.2 The Counsel further urges that the show-cause notice dated 28.2.2015 has been issued and served on the appellant by the Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Kanpur, as the said inquiry being commenced, there is no purpose of the continuation of the prohibitory order is made out. The appellant further relies on the ruling of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Babaji Shivram Clearing & Carriers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Union of India - 2011 (269) ELT 222 (Bom), wherein the Hon'ble High Court in the case before it, where there was no loss of ....