TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (1) TMI 471
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... be unduly harsh and disproportionate to the role of the appellant in the alleged fraud that led to proceedings against them. 2. Briefly stated, the appellant had obtained a licence in 2011 and, owing to admittedly limited experience in the profession, employed two persons, one Saurabh Saini and one Varun Mahajan , as 'H' card holders. During an exercise of reconciliation in 2013, five TR6 challans relating to May and June 2013 were not authenticated against records available with the bank and these were found to be related to Bills of Entry filed through the appellant in the Land Customs Station, Amritsar. In further investigations, eighteen more similar transactions between July 2013 and October 2013 were discovered. In all, it a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... had allowed the two 'H' card holders untrammelled access to importers through the licence issued for customs broking in return for an assured remuneration and by such irresponsible behaviour , ill-befitting a licenced Customs Broker and contrary to the obligations that devolve on brokers, had enabled defrauding of revenue to the extent of the amount covered by the 23 TR6 challans . The competent authority, therefore, held that the licence had been illegally transferred, that business was transacted other than directly or through employees, that amounts received for payment of duty had not been handed over promptly, that speed and efficiency was not shown, that the antecedents of the client had not been ascertained and the condition....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion and having complied with the procedure laid down in the Regulation, invoked the penal provisions of the Regulations. There is no challenge in the appeal on this score. The claim of absence of motive and non-involvement seems to be the main thrust of the plea for a lesser penalty. Wherefore in support, the decision of the Tribunal in KM Ganatra & Co v Commissioner of Customs (General), Mumbai [2007 (219) ELT 316 (Tri-Mum)], claimed to be in identical circumstances as that of appellant, was brought to our notice. The decision in that matter was more an act of clemency, considering the efflux of time since suspension and revocation of the licence, than an exercise in calibrating the severity of the offence with the options available to the....