2024 (9) TMI 715 - HC - Customs

Revocation of Customs Broker License - failure of Customs Broker to comply with Regulations 13(d), 13(e) and 13(0) of CHALR, 2004 - delay in Inquiry Proceedings - HELD THAT - Respondent was holding a CHA license since 1983. Respondent was prohibited from operating at Chennai Customs Port in view of certain mis-declaration in some shipping bill that was reported against the exporter. The license was suspended pursuant to an order passed by the Commissioner of Customs (General) directing discontinuance of the service pending inquiry. By an order dated 30th April 2012 the Commissioner of Customs (General), Mumbai revoked the suspension of CHA license by observing that it was being done as the investigation is still under progress before the investigating unit. The CESTAT took a view that this has been done despite a clear direction to restore respondent s license in the event of Department s failure to conclude the inquiry within three months of receipt of the CESTAT order passed on 15th December 2011. There are nothing incorrect in the conclusion arrived at by the CESTAT. We agree with the CESTAT that there is a specific direction that the Department has to strictly follow it unless that direction is set aside by a superior forum. Appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Validity of setting aside the order of revocation of license and forfeiture of security deposit.
2. Impact of delay in inquiry proceedings on the order-in-original.
3. Legality of keeping the revocation of suspension of license conditional.

Detailed Analysis:
1. The appeal challenged an order by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) regarding the revocation of a Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 2004 (CHALR) license. The CESTAT observed that the Commissioner of Customs had revoked the license conditionally pending an inquiry under Regulation 22 of CHALR, which was deemed arbitrary and beyond the Commissioner's competency. The appeal raised substantial questions of law regarding the correctness of CESTAT's decision in setting aside the revocation order based on non-compliance with CHALR regulations.

2. The respondent, holding a CHA license since 1983, faced suspension due to mis-declaration in a shipping bill at Chennai Customs Port. The Commissioner of Customs directed discontinuance of services pending inquiry, leading to an appeal before CESTAT. In a previous order, CESTAT directed completion of any inquiry under Regulation 22 of CHALR within three months, failing which the suspension would be revoked. Despite this, the Commissioner revoked the suspension citing ongoing investigation, contrary to CESTAT's directive, prompting the appeal.

3. The CESTAT found the Commissioner's conditional revocation of the suspension, pending an inquiry under Regulation 22 of CHALR, to be arbitrary and beyond authority. The CESTAT emphasized that the Department must adhere to directives unless overruled by a superior forum. The CESTAT highlighted that the revocation was not contingent on the outcome of the contemplated inquiry, as required by the previous CESTAT order. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, affirming the CESTAT's decision regarding the revocation of the CHA license.

This detailed analysis encapsulates the issues raised in the judgment, providing a comprehensive understanding of the legal complexities and decisions involved in the case.