2020 (7) TMI 592 - AT - Customs

Revocation of Customs Broker license - forfeiture of security deposit - imposition of penalties - concealment of good bars inside slippers - HELD THAT - The Commissioner of Customs has, merely, concurred with the findings of the inquiry authority and, without narration, let alone consideration, of the several submissions relating to the inquiry, to the extent of repeating the assessment of threats posed to the nation by the lack of diligence on the part of the customs broker , proceeded to revoke the license. It is settled law that, in the absence of a specific procedure, the principles of natural justice shall govern any action that leads to detriment. It would appear that the inquiry had not distinguished itself by conformity to the fundamental requirement of notice of intention to conduct hearings. The request for cross-examination off investigating officer emanated from the charged customs broker and it was incumbent upon the inquiry authority to intimate, and carry on with the deposition of the summoned witness, in, and unfailingly so, the presence of the noticee. In the absence of acceptability of the enquiry report and the consequent reliance placed upon it by the Commissioner of Customs, we are unable to take a view on the correctness, or otherwise, of the charge in the notice issued to the appellant. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and direct the Commissioner of Customs to institute a fresh inquiry and, after detailed consideration of the report arising therefrom as well as the response of the noticee, if any, to pass a detailed order of finding. Appeal disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Proceedings to revoke custom broker license under Customs Broker Licensing Regulations, 2013 for non-compliance with regulation no. 11(n) - Appeal against revocation order.

Analysis:
The appellant, a custom broker, was targeted for non-compliance with regulation no. 11(n) of the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations, 2013, which led to the detection of concealed gold bars in imported slippers. The appellant contested the charge, arguing that the notice lacked substantial evidence beyond failure to verify client antecedents. The inquiry process was criticized for not considering submissions adequately, relying on questionable evidence, and lacking adherence to principles of natural justice.

The Authorized Representative emphasized the appellant's failure to provide "KYC" documents of the importer during the bill of entry filing. However, discrepancies were noted in the inquiry report and the impugned order regarding the influence of unrelated offenses on the decision to revoke the license. The appellant's compliance with the Customs Act, 1962, in other cases was also highlighted to question the fairness of the revocation decision.

The inquiry proceedings were found to be flawed, with the appellant's request for cross-examination not being properly handled, leading to reliance on untested evidence. The Commissioner of Customs endorsed the inquiry findings without addressing the appellant's submissions adequately, resulting in a flawed revocation decision lacking proper justification.

Considering the violations of natural justice and procedural errors in the inquiry, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and directed a fresh inquiry with proper adherence to principles of natural justice. The Commissioner of Customs was instructed to conduct a detailed inquiry and issue a well-founded decision based on the new findings. Additionally, the Commissioner was advised to ensure officials conducting inquiries are well-versed in procedural requirements.

In conclusion, the appeal was disposed of, highlighting the importance of conducting inquiries in compliance with fundamental principles of fairness and justice. The judgment emphasized the need for thorough and unbiased proceedings to uphold the integrity of regulatory actions in such cases.