2020 (3) TMI 587 - AT - Customs

Suspension of CHA License - allegation that the Customs Broker is actively connected with the fraudulent import of certain consignments - Regulation 19(2) of CBLR, 2013 - HELD THAT - The continuous suspension of the licence of the Customs Broker without either conducting an inquiry or issuing a notice for revocation of licence or imposition of penalty is bad in law and needs to the set aside. The appellants have made out a case for seeking the revocation of the suspension of the Customs licence - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
1. Suspension of Customs Broker license under Regulation 19 of CBLR, 2013.
2. Compliance with the procedure for revocation of license or imposing penalty under Regulation 20 of CBLR, 2013.

Issue 1: Suspension of Customs Broker license under Regulation 19 of CBLR, 2013:
The appeal challenged the suspension of the Customs Broker's license under Regulation 19 of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013 (CBLR). The appellant, a Customs Broker, had their license suspended due to suspected involvement in fraudulent import activities. The suspension was confirmed by the Commissioner of Customs without further action for over a year, raising concerns regarding the procedural fairness and compliance with Regulation 19 of CBLR, 2013. The appellant argued that the continuous suspension without conducting an inquiry or initiating proceedings for revocation of the license was unjust and against the law.

Issue 2: Compliance with the procedure for revocation of license or imposing penalty under Regulation 20 of CBLR, 2013:
The second issue revolved around the compliance with the procedure outlined in Regulation 20 of CBLR, 2013 for revoking a license or imposing a penalty. The appellant contended that no action had been taken within the stipulated time frame of 90 days from the receipt of the offense report, as required by Regulation 20. The Departmental Representative presented a letter indicating the initiation of proceedings for license revocation, but the appellant argued that the notice for a personal hearing was defective as it pertained to the confirmation of suspension, which had already been done in 2017. The absence of a show cause notice proposing license revocation or penalty imposition, as well as the lack of appointment of an inquiry officer, further supported the appellant's argument.

In the judgment, the Appellate Tribunal found in favor of the appellant, ruling that the continuous suspension of the Customs Broker's license without following the necessary procedures for revocation or penalty imposition was unlawful. The Tribunal set aside the impugned order, revoking the suspension of the Customs Broker license. The Commissioner was granted the liberty to proceed in accordance with the regulations regarding the revocation of the license or imposition of penalties. The appeal was allowed, providing consequential relief by setting aside the suspension of the Customs Broker license.