East West Freight Carriers Ltd Vs Principal Commissioner of Customs (General) (CESTAT Mumbai)
CESTAT Mumbai held that failure to file declaration detailing particulars of supplier of goods as prescribed in circular no. 16/2009-Customs dated 25th May 2009 is technical irregularity. Hence, revocation and of security deposits under regulation 14 of Customs Broker Licensing Regulations set aside.
Facts- M/s East West Freight Carriers Ltd, holder of customs broker licence, are aggrieved by order of the licensing authority, Principal Commissioner of Customs (General), Mumbai, revoking the licence and forfeiting of security deposit, under regulation 14 of Customs Broker Licensing Regulations, 2018, while imposing penalty of ₹ 50,000, under regulation 18 of Customs Broker Licensing Regulations, 2018, despite the charges set out for initiation of the proceedings, viz., alleged breach of regulation 10(d), 10(e) and 10(f) of Customs Broker Licensing Regulations, 2018, having been held as ‘not proved’ in the enquiry proceedings. The licensing authority had, upon scrutiny of the enquiry report dated 1st February 2024, proposed revision thereof by disagreement memo of 7th March 2024 which was followed with termination of licence and other detriments.
Conclusion- Held that the failure to file the declaration may at best, be considered a technical irregularity inasmuch as it was not noticed by the customs authorities either. In any case, the drawback claims in the seven shipping bills, even if ineligible, is not of such magnitude as to warrant imposition of all the penalties and detriments available in the empowerment of the licensing authority. In our view, the interest of justice would be met by setting aside the revocation and forfeiture of security deposit under regulation 14 of Customs Broker Licensing Regulations, 2018 while upholding the penalty under regulation 18 of Customs Broker Licensing Regulations, 2018.
