2017 (5) TMI 1005 - AT - Customs

Revocation of CHA licence - forfeiture of security deposit - inordinate delay in completion of the process of revocation - Held that - The law is well-settled that compliance with the time-frame stipulated in the Regulations is an essential pre-requisite for the proceedings to be accorded legality and sanctity - There is no doubt that the charge-sheet was issued within the stipulated period and the revocation order was issued within the period prescribed for disposal between receipt of inquiry report and action thereon but the inquiry did take an inordinately long time for completion - the inordinate delay in completing the inquiry proceedings has vitiated the detriment visited upon the appellant - revocation of licence and forfeiture set aside - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant-CHA.

Summary

Issues:
Delay in completion of license revocation process under Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed against the revocation of a customs broker license due to delay in the completion of the process. The licensing authority revoked the license and forfeited the security deposit after alleging the appellant of facilitating misdeclaration of exports. The delay in completing the inquiry proceedings was highlighted, with the charge-sheet being issued within the stipulated period but the inquiry taking an inordinately long time for completion, far beyond the prescribed timeline. The appellant contended that the proceedings were not compliant with the mandatory time-lines prescribed in the Regulations, emphasizing the importance of adhering to the specified time-frame for legality. The Tribunal referenced a previous decision emphasizing the need to comply with timelines in similar cases.

The Authorized Representative argued that the time-frame stipulated in the Regulations is directory, not mandatory, and delays may occur due to peculiar circumstances without impacting the gravity of the offense. However, the Consultant for the appellant, supported by a date chart, maintained that the proceedings' non-compliance with the mandatory time-lines rendered them devoid of legality. The Tribunal reiterated that adherence to the prescribed time-frame is crucial for the proceedings' legality and sanctity, acknowledging the timely issuance of the charge-sheet but emphasizing the excessive delay in completing the inquiry.

Citing a previous decision, the Tribunal held that the inordinate delay in completing the inquiry proceedings had tainted the action against the appellant. Consequently, the revocation of the license and forfeiture of the security deposit were deemed violative of the Regulations, leading to the setting aside of the impugned order. It was clarified that the examination of the propriety and proportionality of the penalties imposed was not conducted in the given circumstances. As a result, the appeal was allowed, and the decision was pronounced in court on 18/04/2017.