2020 (2) TMI 242 - HC - Customs

Revocation of CHA License - time limitation - enquiry not completed within 90 days - HELD THAT - The Tribunal had revoked the suspension of the license and as on today the Petitioner continues to function as a broker. The period of 90 days therefore as far as the Petitioner is concerned cannot be considered as mandatory but it was more of a direction in the interest of the Respondents. Therefore, on this ground alone, the enquiry cannot be quashed. In the reply affidavit the Respondents have explained the reason for delay. They have referred to the proceedings taken place at Jodhpur. Considering the explanation, it cannot be said that there is gross delay and a complete failure of the Respondent to complete an enquiry so as to warrant quashing of the proceedings. The learned Counsel for the Respondents, on instructions, states that the Respondents will complete the enquiry within a period of 12 weeks, however, the Petitioner must co-operate with the same and as far as presence of witnesses is concerned, the Respondents will try their best to examine them but there could arise certain eventualities unforeseen by the Respondents, such as witnesses may take time - accepting the statement of the Respondents that an enquiry will be completed within a period of 12 weeks subject to availability of the witnesses and co-operation of the Petitioner, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

Summary

Issues:
1. Quashing of enquiry conducted against the Petitioner pursuant to an order dated 20 November 2014.
2. Delay in completing the enquiry and its impact on the Petitioner's rights.
3. Compliance with the directions of the Tribunal regarding the suspension of the license and completion of the enquiry.

Analysis:
1. The Petitioner, a holder of Customs House Agents License (CHAL) for Custom Brokers License (CBL), sought a writ to quash an enquiry conducted against them following an order from the Commissioner of Customs (Preventive) Jodhpur. The Petitioner's license was initially suspended, but a statutory appeal led to the suspension being set aside, and an enquiry was directed to be completed within 90 days. The Petitioner filed the present Petition due to the delay in completing the enquiry, alleging prejudice and non-compliance with the Tribunal's mandate.

2. The High Court considered the delay in completing the enquiry and its impact on the Petitioner's rights. The Court noted that the Tribunal's direction to complete the enquiry within 90 days was more of a directive in the interest of the Respondents, rather than a mandatory requirement for the Petitioner. The Respondents provided reasons for the delay, referencing proceedings in Jodhpur. The Court found that the explanation did not indicate gross delay or a complete failure to conduct the enquiry, leading to the dismissal of the Petitioner's request to quash the proceedings based on delay.

3. Addressing compliance with the Tribunal's directions, the Court highlighted that the Petitioner continued to function as a broker following the Tribunal's revocation of the license suspension. The Court emphasized the need for cooperation between the parties to conclude the pending enquiry promptly. The Respondents assured completion of the enquiry within 12 weeks, subject to witness availability and the Petitioner's cooperation. Consequently, the Court disposed of the Writ Petition based on the Respondents' commitment to complete the enquiry within the stipulated timeframe, provided cooperation was extended by all parties involved.