2015 (12) TMI 788 - AT - Customs

Suspension of CHA License - CHA committed contravention of Regulations 11(a), 11(d), 11(e), 11(m) and 11(n) of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013 - Held that - CBLR, 2013 provides for a time-limit of 9 months for completing the enquiry proceedings and taking a final decision from the date on which the licensing authority comes to know of the contraventions by the CHA. From the impugned order, it is seen that the licensing authority came to know of the contravention for the first time on 19-5-2014 and the 9 months time period expires on 19-2-2015. Therefore, the present appeal and stay petition are premature and are accordingly dismissed. In any case, suspension is not a punishment. Punishment will come after enquiry is completed and the licence is revoked. On that ground also, the appeal is not sustainable. - Decided against the appellant.

Summary

Issues:
1. Suspension of Custom House Agent Licence
2. Time period for completing enquiry under CBLR, 2013
3. Prematurity of the appeal

Analysis:
1. The appeal and stay petition were filed against the suspension of the Custom House Agent (CHA) Licence of the appellant, M/s. Express Clearing & Shipping Agency Pvt. Ltd., due to alleged contraventions of specific regulations under the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013 (CBLR, 2013). The suspension was subject to the outcome of the enquiry proceedings under Regulation 20 of CBLR, 2013. The appellant challenged the suspension, emphasizing the impact on their livelihood and sought restoration of the licence.

2. The appellant argued that the suspension should be set aside and the licence restored, citing Circular No. 9/2010-Cus., which prescribes a time period for completing the enquiry. The Deputy Commissioner representing the Revenue contended that the licensing authority became aware of the contraventions on 19-5-2014 and that the CBLR, 2013 allows 9 months for completing the enquiry and making a final decision, with time available until 19-2-2015. Therefore, it was argued that the appeal was premature.

3. The Tribunal analyzed the submissions and noted that the CBLR, 2013 indeed sets a 9-month time limit for completing enquiry proceedings and making a final decision from the date the licensing authority becomes aware of the contraventions by the CHA. As the authority discovered the contravention on 19-5-2014, the 9-month period would expire on 19-2-2015. Consequently, the Tribunal deemed the appeal and stay petition premature and dismissed them. It was clarified that suspension does not equate to punishment, as the actual punishment would follow completion of the enquiry and potential revocation of the licence, rendering the appeal unsustainable on this basis as well.

In conclusion, the appeal and stay petition against the suspension of the Custom House Agent Licence were dismissed by the Tribunal, emphasizing the premature nature of the appeal in light of the prescribed time period for completing enquiry proceedings under the CBLR, 2013. The judgment clarified the distinction between suspension and punishment, highlighting that the appeal was not sustainable given the procedural stage of the case.