9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (6) TMI 86X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by M/s Nikhaar Associates ("the importer") to file bill of entry for clearance of its goods in October 2011. The petitioner collected all the requisite documents, including the authorisation letter (authorizing the concerned representative of the importer, Mr. Subhash to approach the petitioner) to fulfill the 'Know Your Customer' norms ("KYC norms") under CBEC circular no. 9/2010 dated 8-4-2010 and the CHALR. The petitioner subsequently filed the requisite documents and around 22 bills of entry for four months (29-10-2011 to 6-3-2012), towards clearance of the goods imported i.e. "Stainless Steel Circles and Stainless Steel Scrap". The goods were cleared by the customs authorities after verification of all the statutory requirements, genuineness of importer-exporter code and payment of appropriate customs duty and there is nothing on record to show mis-declaration or concealment of facts in respect of the identity of goods of the importer. After this, the importer did not approach the petitioner for any clearance work from March to August. In mid-August, the petitioner was approached by the importer once again to file bills of entry for clearance of "Induction Cookers" (Bill of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sioner of Customs issued a show-cause notice dated 30-1- 2014, seeking to revoke the CHA license of the petitioner. 5. The petitioner alleges that the inquiry officer appointed by the authorities, declined to furnish the documents relied upon for the issue of show-cause notice, despite requests from the petitioner in letters dated 10-2-2014, 11-2-2014 and 26-3-2014. In spite of this, the petitioner filed written "interim replies" on 27-2-2014 before the respondent, requesting hearing. However, on 22-3-2014, the petitioner received a letter dated 14-3-2014 from the office of the Assistant Commissioner of Customs with a copy of the inquiry report dated 4-3- 2014 submitted by the respondent in respect of the show-cause notice dated 30-1-2014. The inquiry report, in relevant part, reads: "1.4 Enquiries made with the owner of the CHA firm and 'G' Card holder viz. Tej Pal Singh indicated that entire clearance work for M/s Nikhaar Associates was being handled by Sh. Tej Pal Singh who met the Proprietor of thisCompany for the first time, long back (7-8 months) ago and obtained IEC Code, PAN Card, Authority Letter etc. On the basis of which he started handling the work of the company and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rmation and informing the Importer accordingly, Not only this, the CHA has also failed to verify antecedents of his client, identity of his client and functioning of his client at the declared address by using reliable, independent authentic documents, data or information. He failed to take care, caution and circumspection for which it appeared a case more as facilitator the Importer to evade the payment of appropriate Customs Duty by mis-declaring the goods, its Quantity and value, by filing documents and without verifying documents and without verifying the facts/details of 'Know Your Customer' (KYC). As much as the CHA did not come forward to avail an opportunity of his defense and no written statement in the support were submitted to me till date. Thus, in view of all above, it is clear case to be held responsibility in contravention of the provisions of Regulations 13(e) and 13(o) of CHALR, 2004, read with Regulation 11(e) and 11(n) of CBLR, 2013." 6. The petitioner, having been denied the right to be heard, has approached this Court seeking that the impugned inquiry report be quashed for being in violation of the principles of natural justice. The petitioner also submits fir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nder Regulation 20. - (1) The Commissioner of Customs shall issue a notice in writing to the Customs House Agent within ninety days from the date of receipt of offence report, stating the grounds on which it is proposed to suspend or revoke the licence and requiring the said Customs House Agent to submit within thirty days to the Deputy Commissioner of Customs or Assistant Commissioner of Customs nominated by him, a written statement of defense and also to specify in the said statement whether the Customs House Agent desires to be heard in person by the said Deputy Commissioner of Customs or Assistant Commissioner of Customs. Provided that the procedure prescribed in regulation 22 shall not apply in respect of the provisions contained in sub-regulation (2) to regulation 20. (2)The Commissioner of Customs may, on receipt of the written statement from the Customs House Agent, or where no such statement has been received within the time-limit specified in the notice referred to in sub-regulation (1), direct the Deputy Commissioner of Customs or Assistant Commissioner of Customs to inquire into the grounds which are not admitted by the Customs House Agent. (3)xxx (4)xxx (5)At the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reply had to be given directly to the Inquiry Officer is without merit, because it is upon receipts of reply by the Commissioner - i.e. the notice issuing official - and a further order by him, that the Inquiry Officer assumes power - under Regulation 22(2) to proceed further. In this case, no such order was made; the Inquiry Officer's report is premised almost entirely on the investigation report and its allegations. 11. It is axiomatic that when the statute requires observance of a step - in this case an opportunity of hearing - as a prelude to exercise of power, the executive agency has to comply with the terms of the provision. The insistence upon giving an opportunity of hearing to a CHA whose license is suspended, is not an idle formality which sadly the impugned order assumes it to be. The impugned inquiry report, therefore, cannot be sustained; it is accordingly quashed. 12. The respondents are hereby directed to give a hearing within three weeks in terms of Regulation 20(3) to the petitioner (since post decisional hearing was held in 2012) and within two weeks thereafter, pass an order either confirming or revoking the suspension order. Likewise, an order under Regulati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
