2020 (2) TMI 1362

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Regulations, 2004. His licence was renewed up to 22-4-2008. The officers of the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI), Bangalore investigated a case pertaining to M/s. Logo Trading and M/s. Azomatrix Impex based in Coimbatore who misdeclared "rejected/torn/damaged items of leather like material with negligible value" as 100% pure leather items with a mala fide intention to claim drawback. 3. After investigating the matter, the officers of DRI seized the goods and issued a show cause notice to the concerned persons through the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore. 4. It is the contention of the Department that the respondent had attended to customs work on behalf of one of the fraudulent exporters by name M/s. Sh....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....25,000/- per month to the respondent for using the licence and stated that he had signed the statement before the DRI under threat. 9. However, the Adjudicating Authority came to the conclusion that the respondent had sublet the broker licence to the said Shri S. Uma Mahesh for Rs. 25,000/- per month, and revoked the licence of the respondent invoking Regulation 18 read with Regulation 20 of the Regulations. He also ordered forfeiture of the entire security deposit collected at the time of issue of licence apart from levying penalty of Rs. 50,000/- under Regulation 22 of the Regulations on the respondent. 10. This was assailed by the respondent before Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Regional Benc....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ed in discharging his obligation under Regulation 11(a) of the Regulations in not verifying the antecedents of the exporters and Regulation 17(a) in not supervising the work of his employees, only penalty of Rs. 50,000/- would suffice and that the respondent was entitled to restoration of his licence. It also set aside the forfeiture of the security deposit directed by the Adjudicating Authority. 14. Assailing the same, this Appeal is filed. 15. Heard Sri B. Narasimha Sarma, Counsel for the appellant. 16. The Counsel sought to contend that under Regulation 18 of the Regulations, the competent authority is entitled to revoke the licence of a customs broker and order for forfeiture of part or whole of the security or i....