9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (12) TMI 429 - AT - CustomsRevocation of CHA licence - period of limitation - Regulation 19(1) of CBLR, 2013 - A perusal of the records of the present case reveals that the initial Show Cause Notice under Regulation 20 has been issued after a delay of over 180 days. It is further seen that the submission of Inquiry Report after the Show Cause Notice also has been considerably delayed as against the mandatory time limit of 90 days, the Inquiry Report stands submitted only after the delay of more than one year - Held that - Hon ble Madras High Court has emphasised the observance of time limits strictly under the CHALR, 2004/CBLR, 2013 in the case of Saro International Freight System Vs. CC, Chennai 2015 (12) TMI 1432 - MADRAS HIGH COURT , where it was held that the impugned show cause notice issued by the respondent is without jurisdiction, as it has been issued beyond the period prescribed in the regulations, which have statutory force and hence, not sustainable. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant-assessee(CHA licensee).
Issues Involved:
1. Challenge against the order dated 14.05.2015 passed by Commissioner of Customs (Gen), New Customs House, New Delhi. 2. Suspension and revocation of CHA license under CBLR, 2013. 3. Allegations of irregularities against the appellant. 4. Time limit adherence in the proceedings. 5. Legal arguments on time limit and merit. 6. Interpretation of CBLR, 2013 regulations regarding suspension and revocation of license. 7. Compliance with the prescribed time limits under CBLR, 2013. Analysis: The appeal was filed against the order issued by the Commissioner of Customs (Gen), New Delhi, suspending and subsequently revoking the CHA license of the appellant due to alleged irregularities. The appellant contested the order on grounds of time limit adherence and merit. The Commissioner's actions were based on the investigation by DRI, Delhi Zonal Unit, which led to the issuance of a Show Cause Notice after a significant delay of over 180 days and submission of the Inquiry Report after more than a year, contrary to the mandatory time limits set by CBLR, 2013. The CBLR, 2013 regulations clearly outline the procedure for suspending or revoking a custom broker's license, emphasizing strict time schedules to be followed. The High Court of Madras decisions in similar cases have highlighted the mandatory nature of the time limits prescribed under CBLR, 2013, stressing the importance of adhering to the specified timelines. The Tribunal has also consistently upheld the significance of complying with the time limits as mandated by the regulations. In light of the legal precedents and the strict interpretation of the time limits under CBLR, 2013, the Tribunal found that the lower authority's order, issued without adhering to the prescribed time schedule, was not in compliance with the regulations. Consequently, the impugned order revoking the CHA license was set aside, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant. The judgment underscores the criticality of observing the specified time limits in proceedings related to the suspension and revocation of custom broker licenses under CBLR, 2013.
|
