Commissioner of Customs vs A.V. Global Corporation Pvt. Ltd.

This appeal is belated and delayed by 52 days and hence an application for delay has been filed. However, before issuing notice on the said application, we deemed it appropriate to examine the merits and ascertain whether it is a fit case in which the High Court should interfere under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962. The impugned order dated 15th January, 2014 quashes penalty/forfeiture of Rs. 40,000/- as imposed for violation of regulation 19(1) and 19(8) of the Customs House Agent Licensing Regulation 2004. Respondent company had employed one Alijah Taqvi. It appears that the said employee had applied to Custom Authorities for issue of H Card on 19th January, 2008 and had enclosed Class XII Pass Certificate with the application. The said Senior Secondary School Certificate was purportedly issued in 1993 by National Open School, Government of India, New Delhi. After examining the certificate and upon satisfaction of other conditions, H card was issued to the said Alijah Taqvi.

Subsequently, it transpired that the certificate was forged in view of the reply received from National Open School.

The finding of the Tribunal is that the respondent company had accepted the said certificate which appeared to be genuine and issued by the National Open School, Government of India, New Delhi. It is accepted that the certificate was also filed with the appellant customs authorities before the H Card was issued. The appellant authorities also accepted and believed that the certificate was genuine and validly issued as was accepted by the respondent employer.

The finding of the Tribunal recorded in this regard is factual and there is no allegation that there was collusion or the respondent employer was aware that the certificate was forged and fabricated and still they had given the undertaking. The amount involved is only Rs. 40,000/- and the decision of the Tribunal being factual, no substantial question of law arises for consideration. In these circumstances, we are not inclined to issue notice on the application for condonation of delay. Accordingly, the applications and the appeal are dismissed.