9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 1505X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2017. Since the counter affidavit has already been filed in one of the Writ Petitions, i.e. in W.P.No.20994 of 2017, both the Writ Petitions were taken together, and disposed of by this common order. 2. In W.P.No.20994 of 2017, the petitioner has challenged the order of suspension issued under Regulation 19 of the Customs Broker Licence Regulation, 2013 (CBLR). Insofar as W.P.No.26820 of 2017 is concerned, the petitioner has challenged the show cause notice, dated 06.09.2017, issued under Regulation 20 (1) of the CBLR. 3. At the first instance, this Court will take up the Writ Petition, challenging the order of suspension, i.e. W.P.No.20994 of 2017. 4. The petitioner was granted customs broker licence under Regulation 7 (1) of CBLR, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 111(d) and 111 (m) of the Act and proposed to impose penalty against the importer as well as the petitioner. 4.2 The petitioner has submitted their reply, dated 20.06.2017, and the show cause notice is pending adjudication before the Customs Authority. While so, the impugned order of suspension has been passed under Regulation 19 (1) of CBLR, suspending the petitioner's customs broker licence with immediate effect. Further, the Commissioner of Customs has furnished the documents already filed prior to the order of suspension. 5. The validity of order of suspension is questioned/impugned in Writ Petition No.20994 of 2017. 5.1 Before I proceed to consider the validity of the impugned order, it is necessary to note, as to how the Regulat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le, where, an enquiry against the Agent (petitioner in this case) is pending or contemplated. 6. In my considered opinion, enquiry should be conducted under the provisions of CBLR, and the respondent cannot fallback upon the show cause notice, which has been issued to the petitioner, under the Customs Act. This is more so, because, the licence has been granted, in terms of CBLR, and enquiry ought to have been commenced against the customs broker, for violation of the licence conditions, and for such other matters, as provided under the Regulations, and in particular, Regulation 18. 7. On a reading of the impugned order of suspension, it is seen that there is no enquiry, either pending, or contemplated against the petitioner, under the C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to be necessarily passed, having regard to the irregularities committed by the Customs House Agent against whom, an enquiry is pending or contemplated. In the absence of contemplation of enquiry or pending enquiry, the suspension order cannot be passed by invoking the power vested with the Commissioner under Section 20 (2) of the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 2004. In this case, liberty has been given to the authority to proceed further, if so advised, in accordance with law. Therefore, we are of the view that the order impugned requires no interference as there is no question of law, much less, a substatial question of law is involved in the Appeal for the purpose of entertainment. Hence, the Appeal is dismissed. No costs. " ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
