The New Delhi Principal Bench of the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), condoned delay of 3 months on the ground that there was no deliberate withholding of information by the Authorised Courier from Customs Department.
The appeal is against the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Airport and General), New Delhi, have ordered forfeiture of the whole amount of security deposit of Rs. 10 lakhs, along with penalty of Rs. Fifty thousand under Regulation 14 of Courier Import and Export Regulations (CIER), 2010 on the Appellant, M/s FedEx Express Transportation & Supply Chain Services India Private Ltd, a Courier Agency, duly licensed by the Customs department.
The Appellant provides courier services under issued under Courier Import and Export (Clearance) Regulations, 2010. The Respondent Commissioner received an offence report from the Deputy Commissioner, informing seizure of ‘psychotropic drugs’ at M/s FedEx Express. Further, in this report it had been stated that there was a delay in examination of the export consignments.
Regulation 12 (vii) of CIER, 2010, which provides –an authorised courier shall not withhold any information relating to assessment and clearance of imported goods or of export goods from the assessing officer. The Commissioner have recorded the finding relying on the report of enquiry officer that the appellant have not disclosed details or kept the customs informed about its findings of fraudulent booking of shipment.
The counsel for the appellant stated that the appellant was in regular touch with the customs. As the Appellant handle several consignments, they are visiting the offices of the customs almost everyday and that it is nowhere alleged that in spite of summons, the Appellant withheld any information from the customs. Accordingly, urged that the allegation is not made out and the findings of the Commissioner are fit to be set aside.
The Tribunal of Anil Choudhary, Judicial Member observed that “So far, allegation under Regulation 12(v) is concerned, the only allegation is that there is delay of about 3 months in bringing details/ information to the knowledge of the customs. I find that the Appellant was in constant touch and had kept the customs informed.”
The Bench concluded by noting that there is only few days gap in informing the particular agency but there is no deliberate keeping back of any information or giving or withholding any information whenever asked for.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
