Sponsored
    Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Setwin Shipping Agency Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Chennai)
Appeal Number : Customs Appeal No. 42682 of 2018
Date of Judgement/Order : 13/01/2021
Related Assessment Year :
Become a Premium member to Download. If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored

Setwin Shipping Agency Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Chennai)

Looking into the circumstances of the case where the custom Broker prima facie has some documents; the person who handed over the documents to the Broker is available; it is not alleged that the exporters were fictitious and the fraudulent persons used the high security IDs and passwords of departmental officers, the omission on the part of the Customs Broker becomes a bit less serious. Under the circumstances, we hold that though there was lapse on the part of the Customs Broker, the same is not at the root of the occurrence of the fraud. We find that the Customs Broker erred inasmuch as non-verifying the antecedents of the exporters and has not obtained authorization. However, we find that the punishment meted out to the Custom Broker should be commensurate with such omission. It is a settled law that penalty should be proportionate to the offence committed. It would be too harsh to revoke the license of the Customs Broker and to leave the right to livelihood of the Customs Broker as well as his employees to the wind. We find that the fact that the Customs Broker’s license was suspended/revoked for a considerable period also needs to be taken on to account.

We find that the license has been under the orders of revocation / suspension for more than two years. Under the circumstances, we find that the customs broker has been sufficiently penalized. For the commission of an offence on the part of the customs broker, the livelihood of many other employees of the firm cannot be put to jeopardy. Therefore as held by this Tribunal in the case of N.T. Rama Rao & Co. Vs CC, CHENNAI-VIII – 2020 (371) ELT 789 (Tri.-Chennai), we find that ends of justice would be met if the security deposited is forfeited and penalty imposed is upheld, while setting aside the order as far as the revocation of the license is concerned.

FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT CHENNAI ORDER

This appeal is filed by, M/s. Setwin Shipping Agency, Chennai, the appellant, a Customs Broker against the impugned order No.66266/2018 dated 22.11.2018 passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Chennai wherein the license of the Customs Broker was revoked and a security deposit was forfeited and penalty of Rs.50,000/- was imposed.

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.

Sponsored

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored
Sponsored
Sponsored
Search Post by Date
August 2024
M T W T F S S
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031