2024 (5) TMI 1007

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ion 19(8) of CHLR, 2004 (Now Regulation 13(12) of CBLR, 2018). After due process, the Commissioner has imposed a penalty of Rs. 50,000/- and ordered for forfeiture of full amount of security deposit furnished by the Appellant. Being aggrieved, the Appellant is before the Tribunal. 2. The Learned Consultant submits that the proceedings were initiated on the basis of OIO No. KOL/CUS/AIRPORT/39/2018 dated 12/02/2018 which was in connection with the exports made by one exporter Marine Vission. This OIO was treated as Offence Report for issuing the present Show Cause Notice for contravention of Regulation 20(1). The Learned Consultant submits that Appellant neither undertook the clearance job for such exports nor was he connected to the exporte....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Pass issued to Sanjeev Kumar Jha. The fact about submission of this letter dated 14/09/2010 was verified with the office record and was found to be correct. Based on the verification carried out, the Enquiry Officer dropped the proceedings against the present applicant. 5. However, the Principal Commissioner of Customs (the present Adjudicating Authority) after granting opportunities for Hearing to the Appellant, has held that the Customs Broker firm had failed to supervise the proper conduct of their employee in the transaction of business. Accordingly, he passed the present order and imposed penalty of Rs. 50,000/- and also ordered for forfeiture of full amount of security deposit. 6. The Learned Consultant submits that the factual det....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....that the Appellant had contravened Regulation 19(8) of CHLR, 2004 (now Regulation 13(12) of CBLR, 2018). The factual details as discussed above clarify that no case has been made out to the effect that Sri Sanjeev Kumar Jha has acted on behalf of the present Appellant. 11. Mere procurement of H-Card by S P Agency to facilitate the working of Sanjeev Kumar Jha cannot be the reason for the present proceedings. A person holding H-Card, if he acts for same third party without the knowledge of the CHA, in what way CHA would be able to control all the activities undertaken by the H-Card Holder is not known. 12. In the present case, against the allegation that the Appellant has not taken up any step to cancel the H-Card issued to Sri Sanjeev Kum....