2017 (9) TMI 1016 - AT - Customs

Revocation of CHA license - forfeiture of security deposit - failure in observance of the time limit - Regulation 20 of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations - Held that - Regulation 20 stipulates that after issuance of SCN, an Inquiry Authority has to be appointed to look into the allegation, who is required to submit inquirty report within 90 days of this appointment as per Regulations 20 (5) - In the present case, it is seen from the records that the Inquiry Officer has submitted his report on 16.03.2017, after a delay of eight months and six days. The time taken by the Inquiry Officer is very much beyond the limit of 90 days prescribed in Regulations 20 (5) - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
1. Appeal against revocation of Customs House License.
2. Allegation of failure to follow time limits in disciplinary proceedings.
3. Justification of revocation based on seriousness of offences.

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed against the revocation of the Customs House License by the Commissioner of Customs, Kolkata. The appellant, a licensed Customs Broker, was involved in certain fraudulent imports investigated by the DRI, Kolkata. The Customs initiated proceedings under the Customs Broker Licensing Regulation-2013, leading to the suspension and subsequent revocation of the license. The appellant challenged this decision through the present appeal.

2. The appellant contended that the Customs Authorities did not adhere to the prescribed time limits in the disciplinary proceedings, which rendered the entire process invalid. Citing relevant case laws, the appellant's counsel argued that failure to follow time limits would vitiate the proceedings. The Inquiry Officer submitted the report after a significant delay of eight months and six days, well beyond the stipulated 90-day limit under Regulation 20 (5) of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations. The appellant relied on a judgment by the Madras High Court to emphasize the mandatory nature of time limits in such proceedings.

3. The Revenue's representative defended the revocation, highlighting the serious nature of the offences as observed by the DRI. However, the Tribunal found merit in the appellant's argument regarding the failure to adhere to the prescribed time limits. Citing the necessity of time limits in the Regulations and the mandatory nature of such provisions, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal filed by the appellant. The decision emphasized the importance of following procedural requirements, including time limits, in disciplinary proceedings related to Customs Broker licenses.