9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (12) TMI 230 - AT - CustomsSuspension of CHA License - Regulation 19(2) of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013 - violation of the principles of natural justice - Held that - Since the statutory period in this case has expired and the enquiry has not yet been completed, the suspension of licence should not be continued. Suspension should not be continued if the enquiry proceedings are not completed within the prescribed time limit of nine months. The appellant s licence was suspended since 14.10.2014 and the same continued to remain under suspension by the impugned order dated 9.12.2014. CBLR, 2013 itself has prescribed an overall time limit of nine months to complete the proceedings against the CHA right from the initiation of the proceedings to its final disposal. None of the time limit has been adhered to by the Customs authorities in this case. In these circumstances, it will be in the interest of justice, equity and fair play to set aside the suspension and allow the appellant to function as CHA, pending completion of enquiry by the Customs authorities. - Petition disposed of.
Issues:
Appeal against suspension of Customs Broker License - Compliance with statutory regulations and principles of natural justice. Analysis: The appeal challenged the suspension of a Customs Broker License by the Commissioner of Customs (General) under Regulation 19(2) of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013 (CBLR). The main issue was whether the suspension order was in accordance with the statutory regulations governing the appellant. The appellant's counsel argued that the suspension was illegal, violated natural justice principles, and did not comply with the timelines set by the CBLR, 2013. The appellant's counsel contended that the charge-sheet was delayed, issued after 129 days instead of before 10.1.2015, as required. Additionally, the enquiry proceedings, including submission of replies and completion of the enquiry, did not adhere to the prescribed timelines under Regulation 20(1) of CBLR, 2013. The appellant requested to set aside the suspension and allow the operation of the Customs Broker License. The counsel cited various judgments to support the argument, emphasizing the importance of timely completion of enquiry proceedings. On the contrary, the Assistant Commissioner argued that the allegations against the appellant were serious, justifying the suspension during the ongoing enquiry. It was contended that the timelines in CBLR, 2013 were directory, not mandatory. A reference was made to a decision by the Calcutta High Court to support this argument. After considering both parties' submissions and the records, the Tribunal found in favor of the appellant. It was noted that the enquiry proceedings had exceeded the prescribed time limits, and the suspension of the license should not continue. Referring to relevant judgments and a circular by the Board, the Tribunal emphasized the importance of completing enquiry proceedings within the stipulated time frame. The order of suspension dated 9.12.2014 was set aside, allowing the appellant to function as a Customs Broker, pending completion of the enquiry proceedings by the Customs authorities. In conclusion, the Tribunal disposed of the appeal by setting aside the suspension order but allowed the Customs authorities to continue with the enquiry proceedings in accordance with the law.
|
