9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (2) TMI 139X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sue of non-observance of the time lines prescribed in the CHA Licensing Regulations, 2004 adding that the show cause notice in this case was issued on 17.7.2013 while the enquiry report was submitted on 26.6.2015 which was beyond the time period prescribed in Regulation 22 of the said Regulations, and that such violation of the prescribed time limit makes the impugned order unsustainable. 3. The ld. DR, on the other hand stated the said time lines are essentially directory in nature and therefore violation thereof would not be fatal to the impugned order. 4. We have considered the contentions of both sides. The issue involves is violation of the time lines prescribed in Regulation 22 of the Regulations of 2004. The regulation is reproduce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... grounds forming the basis of the proceedings, and he may also put any question to any person tendering evidence for or against the Customs House Agent, for the purpose of ascertaining the correct position. (4) The Customs House Agent shall be entitled to cross-examine the persons examined in support of the grounds forming the basis of the proceedings, and where the Deputy Commissioner of Customs or Assistant Commissioner of Customs declines to examine any person on the grounds that his evidence is not relevant or material, he shall record his reasons in writing for so doing. (5) At the conclusion of the inquiry, the Deputy Commissioner of Customs or Assistant Commissioner of Customs shall prepare a report of the inquiry recording ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e notice under sub-regulation (1) of Regulation 22 was issued on 17.7.2013 and the inquiry report by the Deputy Commissioner in terms of Regulation 22 (5) was submitted more than 22 months after that (on 26.6.2015). Sub-regulation (2) of Regulation 20 deals with suspension of licenses and therefore proviso to sub-regulation 1 of Regulation 22 has no relevance to the present proceedings. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Shankar Clearing & Forwarding vs. CC (Import & General) -2012 (283) ELT 349 (Del.), the Hon'ble Madras High Court in Sanco Trans Ltd. Vs. CC, Sea Port/Imports, Chennai - 2015 (322) ELT 170 (Mad.), this Tribunal in Rajeev Mayaer Vs. CC (Import & General), New Delhi - 2014 (308) ELT 146 (Tri.-Del.), in Om Freight Forwarders Pvt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
