9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (11) TMI 196X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ural justice in so far the impugned action is concerned. Besides, the order must speak in itself. An order withdrawing a benefit must give reasons why the benefit has been withdrawn. Non-furnishing of reasons would vitiate such an order. Matter remanded back to respondent No.2 i.e., Principal Commissioner of Customs (General), Mumbai who shall give an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and thereafter pass an appropriate order in accordance with law within a period of 3 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order - petition allowed by way of remand. - WRIT PETITION (L) NO.4418 OF 2020 - - - Dated:- 3-11-2020 - UJJAL BHUYAN ABHAY AHUJA, JJ. Mr. Kiran Jawali a/w. Mr. Gaurav Parkar for Petitioners. Mr. J. B ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se of Custom Broker M/s. S. K. Freight Lines Pvt. Ltd., (Customs Broker No.11/2555) issued under Regulation 7(2)(b) of CBLR, 2018 w.e.f. 26.08.2020 stands withdrawn. 5. Aggrieved, present writ petition has been filed seeking the relief as indicated above. 6. On 15.10.2020, this Court had issued notice on admission as well as on stay fixing today for consideration of the stay prayer. 7. Respondents have filed an affidavit. Stand taken in the affidavit is that petitioner No.1 had applied before respondent No.2 on 18.05.2018 for grant of a new customs broker license under the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations, 2018 on the strength of qualification of petitioner No.2 who had qualified from the Bangalore Customs Commissionerate und ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing qualified under Regulation 9 of the 1984 Regulations from Bangalore Customs Commissionerate ought to have applied for regular license from the said Commissionerate. Otherwise, as per Regulations 7(3) and 7(4) of the 2018 Regulations, petitioners can work as customs broker in all customs stations including at Mumbai after two years. 7.5. That being the core stand of the respondents, it may not be necessary for us to traverse the remaining portion of the pleadings in the affidavit in reply. 8. In the course of the hearing learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the impugned order is violative of the principles of natural justice as petitioners were not heard before withdrawal of license and no reasons are mentioned in the i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... w regulations (2018 Regulations), its license may be withdrawn if there is no compliance, may not meet the requirement of principles of natural justice in so far the impugned action is concerned. Besides, the order must speak in itself. An order withdrawing a benefit must give reasons why the benefit has been withdrawn. Non-furnishing of reasons would vitiate such an order. 13. In that view of the matter, we set aside the impugned order dated 07.09.2020 and remand the matter back to respondent No.2 i.e., Principal Commissioner of Customs (General), Mumbai who shall give an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and thereafter pass an appropriate order in accordance with law within a period of 3 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
