TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 1365
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dated 3.8.2017 passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Chennai - VIII) by which the Customs Broker's license has been revoked and for imposition of penalty of Rs.50,000/- on the Customs Broker under Regulation 18 of CBLR, 2013 and forfeiture of security deposit of Rs.5,00,000/- under Regulation 18 of CBLR, 2013. 2. Brief facts of the case are that Raj Brothers Shipping Pvt. Ltd. who is a Customs Broker License holder granted by the Chennai Customs allegedly mis-declared the goods imported by one M/s. Poonamani Industries, Hyderabad who had imported 'Drawer Channel" from China with a gross weight declared as 9880 kg. The appellant filed Bill of Entry under RMS. On suspicion, SIIB took investigation and on first check, it was found that the goods weighed 28230 kilograms as against the declared quantity of 9880 kilograms by the importer and the value declared by the importer was re-determined. Accordingly, Show Cause Notice dated 13.11.2015 was issued to the importer as well as to the appellant for alleged contravention of the provisions of CBLR, 2013. After due process of law, the Ld. Adjudicating Authority revoked the suspension of the Customs Broker. Hence department has filed the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ter for or on behalf of SIIB & DRI, he has not given any cogent reasons as to why he took Rs.25,000/- in cash (admitted by Customs Broker during hearing) from the Importer when no work/service has been rendered by him. Even for a consignment of declared value of Rs.6,93,308/-, the admitted receipt of Rs.25,000/-appeared to be on higher side only. However, also on reconsideration of the fact that the Importer was forced and that he indeed transferred Ts.2 lakhs through ICICI Bank to Customs Broker or his sister concern, it is clear that the Customs Broker cannot be regarded as simple innocent person. In fact during personal hearing, even to a pointed question of receipt of money from Importer, he answered in negative. He did not even disclose receipt of Rs.2 lakhs in ICICI Bank Account. Men may lie, the documents do not. The Deposit Slips of ICICI Bank showing deposit of Rs.2 lakh by Importer in related account of Customs Broker have tremendous evidentiary value against Customs Broker. This will also indicate that the Customs Broker all along had knowledge of fact of mis-declaration. But acting against prescribed obligations of Customs Broker, he withheld such information from Custo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in the case of Shri Parma Nanda Vs. State of Haryana and others [1989 (2) Supreme Court Cases 177], held that the Tribunal could exercise only such powers which the civil courts or the High Courts could have exercised by way of judicial review. The Supreme Court in that case further observed as under: "....The jurisdiction of the Tribunal to interfere with the disciplinary matters or punishment cannot be equated with an appellate jurisdiction. The Tribunal cannot interfere with the findings of the Inquiry Officer or competent authority where they are not arbitrary or utterly perverse." (emphasis added) Again the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its judgment in State Bank of India Vs Samarendra Kishore Endow [1994 (1) SLR 516], has reiterated its earlier rulings that a High Court or Tribunal has no power to substitute its own discretion for that of the original authority. The Supreme Court in that case further observed as under "On the question of punishment, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the punishment awarded is excessive and that lesser punishment would meet the ends of justice. It may be noticed that the imposition of appropriate punishment is within t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mmissioner of Customs (General) Vs Worldwide Cargo Movers - 2010 (253) ELT 190 (Bom.)/ Commr. of Cus. & C. Ex., Hyderabad-II Vs H.B. Cargo Service - 2011 (268) ELT 448(A.P.)]. 7.1 When evidence is produced before the Original Authority examining an issue, it is for him to consider that evidence. What weight should be attached to such evidence is a matter in the discretion of the authority. A discretionary jurisdiction has always to be excised by the authority, judicially using common sense and not according to whim, caprice or fancy. Furthermore, it must be exercised within the four-corners of the statute. If that is seen to have been done, then great weight is placed by Courts on the decision of the Original Authority who, like in this case, is in a better position to sift and weigh the evidence based on his experience in dealing with procedural aspects of the exim trade. He is thus best suited to arrive at the conclusion regarding the existence or otherwise of a particular circumstance, that would jeopardies government revenue or the economic security of the nation, keeping in view the peculiar facts of each case. 8. We find that the points for determination laid down by reve....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....his office and only the order in original passed by the ADC only was received so as to treat the said order as the offence report is highly improper and contrary to law as the said authority failed to appreciate that original authority having only inflicted the penalty on them the said order by no stretch of imagination could be taken as the offence report as if it suggest to him to proceed against them under the CBLR f. The fact that the respondent did not even consider that the report of enquiry only implicated them in the matter for not disproving the allegation without being aware that the department merely adopted the version of the importer's advocate as if the amount of Rs. 2 lakhs were paid to them on merely representing that the consignment was taken up for investigation claiming it as arm twisting without conducting any inquiry or proving the said allegation overlooking the settled position of law that it is the alleger who is to establish the allegation g. The respondent also failed to see that the it was the importer who had not properly declared the weight of the consignment and is the beneficiary of such mis-declaration and therefore his malicious allegatio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cel the licences of the brokers if they are involved and to impose penalty. The interpretation of a statute must always be to give a logical meaning to the object of the legislation and the aim must be to implement the provisions rather than to defeat it. As laid down by the Apex Court in the judgments relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioners, when a statute prescribes a thing to be done in a particular manner, it must be performed in such a manner. Also, the use of the consequence of the action is the revocation of the licence and it would also pave way for inaction by the officials breeding corruption. It is also to be noted that every act of breach by the Broker would entitle the authorities to initiate proceedings from the date of knowledge of the offence. It is only if the time limit is strictly followed, swift action can be initiated against the Customs Brokers and the authorities can also be made accountable. The Regulations only contemplate initiation of proceeding by issuance of notice within 90 days. While, making out a prima facie case, the respondents ought to have, without any shadow of doubt, treated the word "shall" in Regulation 11 as "mandatory" and n....