2019 (3) TMI 1673 - HC - Customs

Revocation of CHA License - forfeiture of security deposit - submission of enquiry report within time limit - Regulation 17(2) read with 17(5) of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018 - whether the period stipulated under Regulation 17(5) is regulatory or mandatory? - HELD THAT - Issue decided in the case of INDAIR CARRIER PVT. LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (GENERAL) 2016 (5) TMI 775 - DELHI HIGH COURT where This Court has consistently emphasised the mandatory nature of the aforementioned time limits in several of its decisions. There shall be an order of interim stay for four(4) weeks - List for filing of counter on 02.04.2019.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to proceedings initiated by show cause notice dated 05.11.2018 - Enquiry ordered but no appearance requested - Interpretation of Regulation 17(5) of Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018 - Whether the 90-day period for enquiry report submission is mandatory or directory.

Analysis:
The writ petition challenges the proceedings initiated by a show cause notice dated 05.11.2018, with an enquiry ordered in the matter. The petitioner's objections were filed before the Enquiry Officer on 10.12.2018. The key issue raised by the petitioner's counsel is the failure to summon the petitioner for appearance before the Enquiry Officer within the stipulated 90-day period as per Regulation 17(5) of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018. The petitioner argues that the 90-day period is mandatory, citing a previous decision of the Court in support.

In response, the learned Panel Counsel for the respondents highlights that the question of whether the 90-day period under Regulation 17(5) is mandatory or regulatory is currently under consideration in a writ appeal before the Division Bench of the Court. The Court takes note of various judgments on similar issues, including Indair Carrier Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs and others, which seem to support the petitioner's stance on the mandatory nature of the 90-day timeline for submission of the enquiry report.

Considering the arguments presented and the precedents cited, the Court leans towards a favorable view for the petitioner. Consequently, an interim stay order for four weeks is granted. The parties are allowed the liberty to inform the Court of any decision by the Division Bench regarding the issue under consideration. The case is scheduled for the filing of a counter on 02.04.2019, pending further developments or clarifications from the Division Bench.