TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (2) TMI 888
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dition, he has ordered for forfeiture of amount of security deposit furnished by the appellant. 2. The main facts leading to the present appeal are summarized below : (i) The appellants were granted CB Licence on 15.07.20015 and valid upto 16th July, 2025. The proceedings for revocation of CB Licence originated with the receipt of show-cause notice dated 11.08.2017 issued by Additional Director General, DRI. The above show-cause notice, which formed the Offence Report, was issued in the context of certain fraudulent import undertaken by (i) M/s M.A. Traders, Kolkata and (ii) M/s Z.S.Trade Com Pvt. Ltd.. The investigation undertaken by DRI, led to the conclusion that the four consignments imported by M/s M.A. Traders and for which the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent appeal, the appellant is represented by Shri Arijit Chakraborty, ld. Advocate and the Revenue is represented by Shri S. K. Naskar, ld.D.R. 4. The ld.Advocate on behalf of the appellant, submitted that the impugned order has been passed revoking the CB License and ordering forfeiture of the security deposit. He submitted that the punishment imposed is dis-proportionate considering offence alleged against the appellant. He also submitted the following main arguments : (i) In respect of four consignments imported by M/s M.A. Traders, the proprietor is one Mr. Maswood Ahmed, whose statements have been recorded by the Investigating Agency. In respect of import made by M/s Z.S. Tradecom Pvt. Ltd., he submitted that the appellant was not....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as Mr.Abid Ali to establish the correct facts, but the Inquiry Officer, while postponing the personal hearing at the request of the appellant from 12.03.2018 to 13.03.2018, appeared to have recorded the statement of Mr.Maswood Ahmed, in which, he is said to have reiterated his earlier submissions that he never authorized any person to import the goods in the name of the firm. Mr.Abid Ali failed to appear even on 12.03.2018, as recorded by the Inquiry Officer. (iv) The ld.Advocate, further submitted that Regulation 20 (3)(4), makes it clear that the Customs Broker shall be entitled to cross-examine the persons examined in support of the grounds forming the basis of the proceedings. In this connection, he submitted that the Inquiry Authori....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....have filed Bills of Entry only in respect of four consignments imported by M/s M.A. Traders. The Commissioner, at the time of adjudication of the Customs offence, has recorded the fact that the appellant did not have any involvement in the said import made by M/s Z.S. Tradecom Pvt. Ltd.. As such, the alleged violations in respect of various Regulations under Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013, are required to be examined with reference to the import made by M/s M.A. Traders. 8. The proprietor of M/s M.A. Traders is Mr.Maswood Ahmed, but Mr.Ahmed, in his statement, has admitted that he had not authorized any one to import goods in the name of his firm. But the investigation conducted by DRI revealed that Mr.Abid Ali has claimed t....