TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (3) TMI 1034
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ulations 11(a), 11(d) and 11(n) of CBLR, 2013 2. The facts of the case are as under: The appellant filed shipping bill No. 9816453 dated 1.2.2014 in respect of exporter M/s All Crafts Exports. It was found during examination of the consignment that it consisted of 463 packages instead of declared 390 packages of "Jaipur Bench and Wooden Floor Lamps". In addition, red sander wood and sandal wood was found concealed in the consignment. Red sanders and sandal wood are prohibited for export. Having regard to the gravity of the offence the suspension of licence was confirmed vide the impugned order. 3. During the hearing the appellant contended that (i) there was no ground for immediate suspension of the licence. The licence was not suspended....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to be verified by a Custom broker while taking up the assignment are (i) legal name and any other names used (ii) present and permanent address in full, complete and correct. It has been admitted by the appellant that it did not conduct verification of permanent and present address of the exporter which was a proprietorship firm and not a company, partnership firm or trust/foundation. Even with regard to the documents obtained, it has been recorded that PAN card and IEC copy etc. were obtained by the CHA not directly from its client i.e. the exporter but through some third person namely Shri Mohd. Hussain Khan who was representing a Freight Forwarder Agent. Regulations 11(a), 11(d) and 11(c) of CBLR, 2013 require a customs broker to requir....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of that case suspension of the licence need not be continued after 10 months of suspension. The cases of N.C. Singha & Sons (supra) and others cited by the appellant deal with very different facts and circumstances. It is pertinent to mention here that the documents filed by CHA are treated with a certain degree of trust by Customs and such trust was completely violated in the present case. Nothing can possibly be a graver mis-conduct on the part of a CHA than to file Shipping Bill without making even preliminary enquiries about the genuineness of exporter in the name of which the S/B was filed. Such dereliction of duty on the part of a CHA, can potentially have even graver financial/security consequences. Thus the appellant totally failed ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ted. In the case of Arvind Bhagat (supra), the order of Madras High Court has been left undisturbed by the Apex Court. It was a case where the CHA had failed to discharge his obligation to exercise proper supervision. In the case of Sri Kamakshi Agency (supra), the CHA was held responsible for the fraudulent activities of a third party whom it had delegated, its functions, That was also left undisturbed by the Supreme Court. The present case is some what similar to one of Sri Kamakshi Agency, if not worse, Here, the CHA has brazenly defended his Regulation 8 employee who gave a fake name of his brother as an importer for undervaluing the imported car. Thus, the employee of the CHA was party to the Firm. The CHA has not disowned him and has,....