TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (10) TMI 782
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ropped. 2. RVL Logistics (I) Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the appellant or CB) are holding CB License No. R-54/DEL/CUS/2007 valid up to 31.12.2027 issued by New Delhi Customs Commissionerate, is a licensed Customs House Agent/Customs Broker (CHA/CB). The CB is allowed to operate as CB in Mumbai in terms of Regulation 7(2) of the CBLR. 2013 and have been allotted CB No. 11/1606 (Code No. 1754) at Mumbai Customs. 3. The appellant filed 16 bills of entry under Section 59 of the Customs Act, 1962 for warehousing of the goods on behalf of M/s AAA Impex Services for clearance of "Micro SD Cards 128‟, during the period from June 2013 to November 2013 imported from M/s Octagon International FZCO, UAE. The clearance work was underta....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....revealed that M/s AAA Impex Services has re-exported 04 consignments of Micro SD Cards 128 in the past also. These re-exported Micro SD Cards 128 were earlier imported and kept in the Bonded Warehouse at CWC, Vashi. 6. It further appeared that the consignments were declared as of Indian origin in the shipping bill and of UAE origin in the bill of entry, whereas the marking on the goods suggested that the goods were of Taiwan origin. Thus, it appeared that there is mis-declaration both at the time of import and again at the time of export as regards description, country of origin and value. 7. Following investigation, show cause notice was issued to the importer - M/s AAA Impex Services and others dated 11 March, 2015 proposing to hold the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....penalty on the CHA company was reduced and penalty on its Director was set aside and CB firm is in further appeal before this Tribunal. 9. Thereafter show cause notice dated 14 May, 2018 was issued on the appellant - CB referring to the aforementioned bills of entry and shipping bills filed for M/s AAA Impex Services. Pursuant to investigation and enquiry emerged that M/s Optagun International in collusion with M/s AAA Impex Services have participated in Hawala operations of currency in terms of para 2.35 of FTP 2009-2014 by export of such goods to Iran which have been imported against payment of convertible currency is permissible against payment in Indian rupees subject to at least 15% of value addition. But without such compliance M/s A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sioner was pleased to impose penalty under Regulation 18 read with Regulation 20(7) and 22 of CBLR, 2013, dropping the proposal of revocation and forfeiture of security deposit. Being aggrieved the appellant - CB in appeal before this Tribunal. 13. Learned Counsel for the appellant urges that the findings of the enquiry officer are not sustainable on merits. Enquiry report is based on the premises that the appellant failed to convey cargo clearance related information for export, and thus they did not exercise due diligence in discharging their obligation under Regulation 11(e) of CBLR. Further, the appellant did not verify the antecedents, correctness of IEC number, identity of their client and functioning of the client at the declared ad....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... not established and fit to be set aside. 15. As regards the charge of Regulation 11(n), the said regulation provides that a CB shall verify the antecedent, like correctness of IEC number, identity of his client and functioning of his client at the declared address by using reliable, independent, authentic documents, data or information. Learned Counsel urges that there is no dispute as regards identity of the importer, correctness of their IEC number. Further, there is no case of dubious antecedents of the client - M/s AAA Impex Services. The appellant have relied upon the IEC number and other KYC documents received by them through the reliable intermediary M/s Radiant Maritime India Pvt. Ltd. Further the appellant CB had procured and fur....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ce. Nor there is any allegation by the client of any mis-declaration made at the instance of the appellant CB. Further under the facts and circumstances, there is no way the appellant could have verified the description, value or the country of origin, and the same were as per document provided to them. Further, there is no allegation nor any case made out that the appellant CB has knowingly used any documents which are not true or dubious. Further there was no apparent reason for the appellant to doubt any of the documents provided to them by their client. Moreover under the scheme of the CBLR, 2013, the appellant CB is required to vigilant and if anything irregular comes in his knowledge, than to advise his client properly and if required....