2015 (10) TMI 1907 - AT - Customs

Suspension of license of CHA - Pending proceedings under Regulation 22 of CHALR, 2004 - Time limit to complete the proceedings i.e. 9 months, is not complied with - Revenue wants time ascertain the factual position - Held That - None of the time limits as mentioned in CHALR 2004 hes been adhered to by Department - Impugned order is set aside - Department is at liberty to continue the enquiry - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
- Suspension of license of Clearing House Agent (CHA) pending enquiry
- Adherence to time limits for completion of enquiry proceedings
- Applicability of Board's circular on time limits
- Legal precedent regarding suspension orders

Suspension of license of Clearing House Agent (CHA) pending enquiry:
The appeal was directed against an Order-in-Original suspending the license of a CHA pending enquiry proceedings under Regulation 22 of the CHALR, 2004. The Commissioner appointed an Enquiry Officer to investigate the matter and directed the proceedings to be completed within three months. The appellant argued that despite the directions, the enquiry was not concluded, and the suspension continued, causing hardship. The appellant requested the suspension to be set aside, citing the Board's circular on a time limit of 9 months and legal precedents supporting their plea.

Adherence to time limits for completion of enquiry proceedings:
The Customs authorities failed to adhere to the prescribed time limits for completing the proceedings against the CHA, as mandated by the CHALR, 2004. The appellant's license had been suspended since September 24, 2012, and despite directives to complete the proceedings within three months, no progress was made. The Tribunal noted the non-compliance with time limits and emphasized the importance of equity and justice in setting aside the suspension to allow the appellant to resume functioning as a CHA.

Applicability of Board's circular on time limits:
The appellant relied on a Board circular from 2010, which set a time limit of 9 months for concluding proceedings from the initiation date. The appellant argued that this time limit was not adhered to by the authorities, further supporting the request to lift the suspension. The Tribunal considered this argument alongside the failure to comply with the time limits specified in the CHALR, 2004, in deciding to set aside the suspension order.

Legal precedent regarding suspension orders:
The appellant referenced legal precedents, including decisions from the Hon'ble High Courts of Delhi and Calcutta, to support their plea for setting aside the suspension order. The Tribunal considered these precedents along with the facts of the case and the failure to adhere to time limits in reaching the decision to revoke the suspension while allowing the Customs authorities to continue with the enquiry proceedings as per Regulation 22 of the CHALR, 2004.

In conclusion, the Tribunal set aside the suspension order dated October 23, 2012, allowing the appellant to function as a CHA pending the completion of the enquiry by the Customs authorities. The decision highlighted the importance of adhering to prescribed time limits, equity, and justice in such matters.