9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 671X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sing Regulations, 2004 (CHALR, 2004). The security deposit of Rs. 75,000/- furnished by the appellant was also ordered to be forfeited. The appellant have filed miscellaneous application for early hearing which has been allowed. 2. The facts leading to the present appeal are that the appellant had obtained CHA license No. R-28/Del/Cus/2010. Using the above CHA licence the appellant filed several shipping bills for export of goods by five different exporters in the month of September, 2011 at Air Cargo Exports, New Customs House, New Delhi. Though, the consignments were allowed for export by the said officers after verifying the description etc., on examination by the officers of SIIB, Export Commissionerate, mis-declaration of value as wel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t. The total time period of nine months prescribed for completion of regular proceedings has not been complied with in the present case. On merits, the appellant has denied the allegations of contravention of the provisions of Regulation 13(o) as well as 19(8) of the CHALR, 2004. 4. Ld. AR reiterated the impugned order and stated that the revocation of licence has been made on justifiable grounds. 5. Under the CHALR, 2004 Regulation 20 empowers the Commissioner to suspend or revoke the licence and the procedure which needs to be followed in this regard is found in Regulation 22. For ready reference Regulation 22 is reproduced as under: "22. Procedure for suspending or revoking licence under Regulation 20- (1) The Commissioner of Custo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t 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 his findings and submit his report within ninety days from the date of issue of a notice under sub-regulation (1). &n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in 90 Days from the date of issuance of the show cause notice. 22(7) 20(7) Passing of order by the Commissioner. Within 90 Days from the date of submission of the Inquiry Report. TOTAL DURATION 270 DAYS OR 9 MONTHS 7. Since what constitutes offence report has not been spelt out in the regulation, the same will have to be inferred from the circumstances of the case. From the records we find that the licensing authority namely the Commissioner of Customs (Import & General) has been apprised of the matter by the Commissioner of Customs (Export) through Order-in-original dated 12.03.2013. This may be practically considered as the offence report. The show cause notice proposing revocation has been issued on 12.07.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he date of receipt of the offence report. Consequently, the period of 90 days should commence only from that date. If so calculated, the impugned proceedings have obviously been initiated beyond the period of 90 days.' The ratio of the above decision that the time limits prescribed are to be mandatorily followed has also been followed by this Tribunal in several of its decisions such as- (i) 2016-TIOL-157-CESTAT-DEL M/s Altharva Global Logistics vs. Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi (ii) 2015-TIOL-2467-CESTAT-DEL M/s Lohia Travels and Cargo vs. Commissioner of Customs (General), New Delhi. (iii) 2016-TIOL-524-CESTAT-DEL M/s Zen Cargo Movers Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi. 8. We find the Hon'ble H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
