2018 (3) TMI 1561 - HC - Customs

Suspension of CHA Licence - Regulation 19 of CBLR, 2013 - Time limitation - Held that - Regulation requires the Commissioner of Customs to issue notice in writing to the broker within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of an offence report and the Regulation does not contain any further provision in the event of its non compliance - Therefore, we are not persuaded to think that the 90 days period prescribed in Regulation 19(1) is one of limitation, as contended by the learned Counsel for the appellant, rendering further proceedings under the Regulation invalid. Appeal dismissed - decided against appellant.

Summary

Issues: Challenge to suspension of customs broker license under Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013.

In this judgment by the High Court of Kerala, the appellant, a licensed customs broker, challenged the suspension of their license by the respondent under Regulation 19 of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013. The learned Single Judge initially declined to interfere with the suspension order but directed that further proceedings under Regulation 20 be completed within three months. The appellant contended that the suspension lacked justification and that the proceedings were time-barred under Regulation 20, which was refuted by the respondent's counsel.

Regulation 19 of the Regulations empowers the Commissioner of Customs to suspend a broker's license in cases where immediate action is deemed necessary pending an inquiry or contemplated inquiry. The Commissioner must provide an opportunity for a hearing within 15 days of the suspension and may either revoke or continue the suspension based on the circumstances. The suspension order in this case, Ext.P1, detailed the allegations against the appellant and indicated that the suspension was justified under Regulation 19(1). Subsequently, Ext.P3 continued the suspension under Regulation 19(2).

The Court found that prima facie grounds existed to justify the suspension based on the contents of Exts.P1 and P3. Regarding the appellant's argument on limitation under Regulation 19(1), the Court noted that the regulation does not specify consequences for non-compliance with the 90-day period for issuing a notice to the broker after receiving an offense report. Therefore, the Court did not consider the 90-day period as a limitation, as contended by the appellant, rendering the proceedings invalid.

Despite this, the Court recognized the urgency of completing the proceedings and directed that they be concluded within three months from the judgment date. The respondent assured that the inquiry was scheduled, and final orders would be passed promptly if the appellant cooperated. Consequently, the Court dismissed the writ appeal, emphasizing the need for expedited proceedings and setting a timeframe for their completion.