TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (4) TMI 1159
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lations 23 of Customs Broker Licensing Regulation (CBLR) 2013. 2. Shri Pravin Jha an employee of the appellant had helped one Mr. Atish, who was a private person in taking delivery of the goods under Bill of Entry 9778610 dated 5-4-2013 after the Out of Charge order was given by the Customs. Shri Atish had provided Mr. Pravin Jha documents such as Duplicate/Triplicate copies of the Bill of Entry, Gate pass, Delivery Order, Airway Bill, etc., for taking delivery of the goods. Mr. Pravin Jha had allowed Mr. Atish to fill the details of his Kardex pass (Customs pass) and sign the same on his behalf. In other words, he allowed his employee details (as employee of appellant-CHA) and signature to be misused for taking illegal delivery of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ommissioner of Customs. 3. Heard both sides. 4. The ld. Counsel for the appellant stated that the importer M/s. Team 24 Marketing Pvt. Ltd. is not their client and they were not at all aware of the act of their employee Mr. Pravin Jha till the order of prohibition of their license was received by them. Thereafter, they terminated the services of Mr. Pravin Jha on 30-4-2014. According to him, Mr. Pravin Jha had acted in his own capacity and not as their employee and the act of Mr. Pravin Jha is not an act to be considered within the scope of employment with them. Therefore, there is no question of violation of CBLR Regulations for which their license has been prohibited to be used in Mumbai. He pleaded that punishment by way of s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... But it is not on record whether such action has been proposed against Mr. Pravin Jha. 7. As regards the punishment meted out to the appellant by way of prohibition of license, we find that there is not even a iota of evidence to the effect that the appellant was aware of the fraudulent activities of Mr. Pravin Jha. From the record it is not established at all that the appellant either knew the importer or knew Shri Atish, who had taken the help of Mr. Pravin Jha in the clearance of the goods. In fact, the appellant terminated the employment of Shri Pravin Jha. But the appellant's license has been prohibited under Regulation 23 of the CBLR. Nowhere has it been brought out that the appellant had any business relation with the importer.....