2018 (11) TMI 855

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oked and the security deposit amounting to Rs. 75,000/- was ordered to be forfeited. 2. The appellant is licensed under the Customs Broker Licensing Regulation, 2013 by the Commissioner of Customs (Preventive), Kolkata. They have been permitted to operate under Mumbai Customs by the Commissioner of Customs (General), Mumbai. The appellant filed certain bills of entry in Navasheva Customs House on behalf of M/s. Uni Colloids Impex Pvt. Ltd. for import of 'Wheat Gluten/Wheat Gluten Amugluten 160'. The DFIA License was also attached for duty free items. The Customs Authority noticed that the licenses attached did not cover the goods under import. Consequently the goods were ordered for confiscation under Section 111 of the Customs Act, 1962....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dings are liable to be quashed. ii) On merit also he submitted that the impugned order is not justified. He brought to our notice that the show cause notice for the alleged customs offence dated 11.11.2016 issued by the Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai was adjudicated by issue of the Order dated 14.09.2018. In the said order, while upholding the confiscation under Section III of the Customs Act, the ld. Commissioner has observed that there is no jusitification to hold that the appellant (who was one of the noticees) has failed to sensitise his client i.e. the importer. Accordingly, no penalty has been imposed on the appellant by the ld. Commissioner. iii) Finally he submitted that the impugned order may be set aside. 5. Ld. DR justi....