Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S Professional Impex Pvt. Ltd vs Cc (General), New Delhi on 6 January, 2016
CUSTOMS EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL West Block No.2, R. K. Puram, New Delhi, Court No. I Date of hearing / decision : 06.01.2016 For Approval and Signature: Honble Mr. Justice G. Raghuram, President Honble Mr. R. K. Singh, Member (Technical) 1 Whether Press Reporter may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 26 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982? 2 Whether it should be released under Rule 26 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the Order? 4 Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental authorities? Customs Appeal No. 52656 of 2015 and Customs Misc. Application No. 52311 of 2015 (Arising out of order-in-original No. 20/NK/Prohibition / Policy/2015 dated 25.02.2015 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (General) New Delhi). M/s Professional Impex Pvt. Ltd. Appellant Vs. CC (General), New Delhi Respondent
Appearance:
Sh. Prashant Srivastava, Advocate for the appellant Sh. Amresh Jain, DR for the Revenue - Respondent Coram:
Honble Mr. Justice G. Raghuram, President Honble Mr. R. K. Singh, Member (Technical) Final Order No. 50099/2016 Per: R. K. Singh:
Appeal has been filed against order of the Commissioner dated 25.02.2015 in terms of which the following order was passed:
In exercise of power conferred under Regulation 23 of CBLR, 2013, I withdraw the permission granted under Regulation 7(2) of CBLR, 2013 and prohibit M/s Professional Impex Pvt. Ltd., the CB to continue to work as Customs Broker at Delhi Customs Stations. The CB is directed to surrender all the cards issued to them in respect of the said licence issued from this Commissionerate immediately.
13. This order is being issued without prejudice to any other action that may be taken against the CHA or any other person(s) /firm(s) etc under the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962 and Rules / Regulations framed there under or any other law for the time being in force for the present or any other past violations committed by them.
2. the appellant has contended that (i) the said order was passed under the mistaken identity inasmuch as the action was taken on the basis of report of Additional Director General, DRI Headquarter, New Delhi vide letter F. No. DRI/HQ-CI/50D/Enq.-39(INT-13)2014/662 dated 16.02.2015 wherein it was stated that some unscrupulous exporters attempted to export Floor Coverings, classified under various heading of Chapter 57, by overvaluing the same in order to avail/ claim undue export incentives such as Duty Drawback & Focus Product Scheme and that out of nearly 260 S/Bs covering the said goods, the appellant filed the following shipping bills:
Sr. No. Exporter IEC No. No. of S/Bs FOB Value (in Rs.) DBK claimed (in Rs.)
1.
M/s S. K. Impex 0514038560 31 19,47,98,335 1,75,29,965
2. M/s Adya International 0509082238 27 16,13,61,584 1,46,83,912
3. M/s Surya International 0514042478 16 8,17,75,440 74,41,574
4. M/s Siddhi International 051437326 35 19,47,65,021 1,59,87,320
5. M/s Lovely Overseas 0514036150 40 21,42,85,714 1,95,00,000 Total 149 84,69,86,114 7,51,42,771
(ii) It had nothing to do with the S/Bs mentioned in the table above and that the DRI itself vide its letter F. No. DRI/HQ-CI/50D/Enq-39/INT-13/2014/1204 dated 01.04.2015 stated that the said shipping bills were filed by M/s P. I. Logistics (India) Pvt. Ltd., and not by M/s Professional Impex Pvt. Ltd., (the appellant) and that in its earlier letter dated 16.02.2015 M/s Professional Implex Pvt. Ltd. may be substituted with M/s P. I. Logistics Pvt. Ltd. It stated that based on the later letter of DRI dated 1.4.2015, the Commissioner of Customs vide its order dated 16.04.2015 suspended the custom broker licence of M/s P. I. Logistics Pvt. Limited.
3. Ld. DR did not controvert the above submissions of the appellant and merely stated that the appellant and M/s P. I. Logistics Pvt. Limited have a common Director.
4. We have considered the contentions of both sides. At the outset, it may be mentioned that M/s P. I. Logistics Pvt. Ltd. and the appellant namely M/s Professional Impex Pvt. Limited are two independent legal persons and therefore it is of little consequence that both have one common Director. It is also undisputed that the action against the appellant was taken on the basis of DRI letter dated 16.02.2015 but vide its later letter dated 01.05.2015, DRI categorically stated that the shipping bills in question were filed by M/s P. I. Logistics Pvt. Ltd. and that in its letter dated 16.02.2015, the words M/s Professional Impex Pvt. Ltd. may be substituted with M/s P. I. Logistics Pvt. Limited. The net result consequently is that there was no basis to initiate proceedings against the appellant in the first place but for the mistake committed by DRI which was corrected vide its letter dated 01.04.2015. In the circumstances, the impugned order is clearly unsustainable and therefore set-aside. The appeal is allowed. The Miscellaneous Application for early hearing also stands disposed of.
(Justice G. Raghuram) President (R. K. Singh) Member (Technical) Pant 2