TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (12) TMI 393
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ts were recorded of Shri Dattatray Weling, Prop. Of M/s D. S. Agencies, Shri Chandrakant Sakharam Sawant, Director m/s Inter Express Logistics (P) Ltd., Shri Jaikishan B. Kotak (son of the Prop. of appellant firm) and Shri Bipin Pragi Kotak (husband of the prop. of the appellant custom broker). Statement of Sh. Dinesh Ojha, an employee of the appellant firm was also recorded. In all these statements it transpired that Sh. Jaikishan B. Kotak, Bipin Pragi Kotak and Sh. Dinesh Ojha have actively participated in conspiring and organizing the smuggling in the aforementioned import at JNPT, Nhava Sheva. The offence report in the said case was issued on 10.11.2015 and the custom SCN was issued on 19.11.2016. 2.1 Thereafter proceedings against the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rm) and Shri Bipin Pragi Kotak (husband of the prop. of the appellant custom broker) and Shri D. Ojha is similar to the role of Shri Chandrakant Sakharam Sawant of Inter Express Logistics (P) Ltd. and thus the proceedings should be set aside. 2.5 Ld. Counsel further argued that there has been delays in the proceedings in violation of Regulation 20 of the Custom Broker License Regulation 2013. 3. Ld. AR relies on the impugned order. He argued that Sh. D. Ojha was a G Card Holder of the appellant Custom Broker. He pointed out that the inquiry report clearly brings out the role of Sh. Dinesh Ojha in the entire smuggling activity. He thus argued that the impugned order needs to be upheld. He relied on the following judgments: * K M Ganatra ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... by the bestowing of any gift or favour or other thing of value;" A perusal of regulation 17(1) shows that a custom broker is required to verify the antecedents of the employees before hiring by identifying the antecedents and identity at the declared address by using reliable independent authentic documents, data or information. It is seen that the charge made in the proceedings does not clearly bring out as to how the custom broker has failed in this regard. In absence of specific charge, the said allegation cannot be confirmed. Similarly, Regulation 17(9) excepts supervision of employees in the transaction of business. This charge can only be made in respect of cases where the imports are made through the Custom Broker themselves in tr....