Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2016 (1) TMI 625

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....that one Salim Lalani operating in the name of M/s. Mahek Consultancy Services was engaged in the large scale import clearances of miscellaneous goods by using various CHA licenses. Accordingly, the office premises of M/s. Mahek Consultancy Services were searched under panchanama dated 20-11-2008 and certain files, register, documents and Indian currency of Rs. 1,30,000/- were recovered. The documents showed that the clearances were also effected using the CHA license of M/s. Dakor Clearing & Shipping Pvt. Ltd. (appellant). 2.2 The premises of the present appellant were inspected on 21-11-2008 and the dockets pertaining to M/s. Mahek Consultancy Services were taken over under summons and the live consignments of the CHA were put on hold for further investigation. In the meantime, the Bills of Entry filed for the import consignments by the appellant CHA - M/s. Dakor Clearing & Shipping Pvt. Ltd. were kept on hold to avoid the unauthorized sub-agents from clearing the goods, under these Bills of Entry. 2.3 Statement of Shri Salim S Lalani, the proprietor of M/s. Mahek Consultancy Services was recorded on 24-11-2008 under Section 108 of the Customs Act, wherein he stat....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....enue that appellant/CHA firm has contravened the provisions of Regulations of the CHALR, 2004. Therefore, the CHA License No. 11/954 was placed under suspension vide Order No. 141/2009, dated 6-3-2009 under the provisions of Regulation 20(2) of CHALR, 2004 for suspected violation of Regulations of CHALR, 2004 and inquiry proceedings were initiated under Regulations 22 of CHALR, 2004 vide notice dated 8-6-2009. On the basis of the relied upon documents, the following Articles of Charges were framed against the CHA vide Notice dated 8-6-2009 : - Article of Charge - I : As per Regulation 12 of the CHALR, 2004 'every license granted or renewed under these regulations shall be deemed to have been granted or renewed in favour of the licensee and no license shall be sold or otherwise transferred'. Article of Charge - II : As per the provisions of Regulation 13(a) - 'A CHA shall obtain an authorization from each of the companies, firms or individuals by whom he is for the time being employed as CHA and produce such authorization whenever required by the Dy. Commissioner of Customs or the Assistant Commissioner of Customs.' Article of Charge - III : As per Regulation....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he same time, some weightage needs to be given to the version of the charged CHA that he was deprived of cross examining those persons whose statements were declared to be confessional. In this regard Inquiry Officer is of the opinion that it is required to be noticed that unless the persons concerned are examined and cross examined, it cannot be conclusively held whether the statements are voluntary or otherwise. Keeping aside this particular aspect of legal and technical nature, Inquiry Officer has further attempted to analyze the defense submission of the charged CHA with reference to the Article of Charges framed against them. (ii)    The Inquiry Officer has stated that the salient points that are urged by the charged CHA are as under : - (a)      It was stated that in his statement Shri Nimesh Joshi has deposed that he was aware that 9 IECs of 9 different firms were fake, which formed the basis for levelling charges against him. However there was no evidence established against the fake nature of the IECs. In as much as 2 persons have signed on authorization given to the CHA, one in the capacity of Proprietor and anothe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2013, copy received by the CHA on 24-2-2013. A reply was filed before the Inquiry Officer by written submission dated 16-5-2013. All the articles of charges were denied by the appellant CHA. By report dated 8-7-2014, the Inquiry Officer filed his report and held that none of the Articles of Charges have been proved. The Commissioner issued a "Disagreement Memo on 4-8-2014" and thereafter by Written Submissions dated 1-9-2014 and 29-9-2014, the appellant CHA filed a detailed rebuttal/reply to the Disagreement Memo. The respondent Commissioner by Final Order dated 19-11-2014 held that all the articles of charges stood proved against the CHA and permanently revoked the CHA licence and also ordered for forfeiture of the entire amount of Security Deposit. 3.1 The learned Counsel further submitted that the Commissioner has not brought on record any fresh evidence to factually disprove/upset the findings of the Inquiry Officer, who had dropped the Articles of charges, being the initial fact finding authority. 3.2 The Commissioner also did not appreciate that the appellant/CHA has suffered enough punishment, as an alternative submission, as the CHA licence has remained inop....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....for the Revenue relies on the impugned order. 5. Having considered the rival contentions, we find that in charge-sheet dated 8-6-2009, no name of witnesses have been given or cited. Further, the statements of the persons which have been relied upon by the learned Commissioner, accepting the same as confessional in nature, but the said persons were neither examined nor cross-examined in the proceedings before the Commissioner and as such, have got no evidentiary value in terms of the provisions of Section 138B of the Customs Act. There is no evidence on record that the CHA license of the appellant have been allowed to be used by unauthorized person for monitory benefit. There is no evidence of any sale or transfer of the license and that there is no illegality in procuring work through other persons and/or referees. It is further a matter of record from the statement of Shri Javed Lalani that Shri Salim Lalani, who was working with Mahek Consultancy Services and also Vijay Manjrekar were issued BCHAA Pass (Bombay Custom House Agents Association), which is not a pass recognized by the Customs authorities for clearance work. None of the three persons namely, Javed Lalani, Sali....