9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (11) TMI 591X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... investigation allegedly it is found that the CB had failed to fulfil their obligations under Regulation 10(b), 10(d), 10(e) and 10(n) of CBLR, 2018 by not verifying the correctness of export consignment and not collecting the authorisation and KYC from the exporter directly. In the present order, the Commissioner has not applied his mind on the aspect as to whether immediate action was necessary and thus, on this ground alone the order of continuation of suspension of the CB licence of the appellant fails. Moreover, apparently, the authorities have failed to complete the Regulation 17 proceeding within the time limit stipulated therein. The Hon ble High Court, Calcutta has also found that the inquiry proceeding was completed without supplying relied upon documents to the CB and hence, the said inquiry report has been set aside by the Hon ble High Court, Calcutta - On query, it is learnt that afresh inquiry proceeding is yet to be concluded by the newly appointed Inquiry Officer. In such scenario, the suspension of licence of appellant cannot be allowed to continue since the same has irreversible civil consequences on the appellant/ CB. There is no necessity to continue wit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctorate of Revenue Intelligence (in short DRI ), Kolkata had intervened into the consignments and conducted 100% examination of the goods. However, the business of the appellants was not disturbed by DRI, Kolkata. On 07.09.2018, the officers of DRI, Kolkata called the partner of the appellants over phone and directed him to attend the office of DRI, Kolkata. Immediately thereafter, the partner of the appellants firm duly attended the office of DRI, Kolkata when he was asked to inform the activity of Babul Dey in connection with those 4 Shipping Bills of M/s.Skivvies Textile filed during 08.08.2018 and 09.08.2018 respectively through the petitioner firm. In reply, the partner of the petitioner firm had duly informed that all acts and performances required on the part of CB in respect to the said 4 Shipping Bills were duly made by the employees of the CB and Babul Dey had only procured the job. Suddenly on 08.02.2019, at about 5.30 pm -6.00 p.m., it was found that processing of Shipping Bills and/or Bills of Entry filed by the CB has been stopped without any prior notice or information to the appellants and from the EDI system, it came to the knowledge of the appellants that at the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in July 2018, but the Customs Broker did not get him duly approved by the Deputy Commissioner of Customs or Assistant Commissioner of Customs. It is alleged that M/s.M.K.Saha Company has violated the provision of Regulation 10(B) of CBLR, 2018. It is the case of the department that since the appellant was not engaged as a Customs Broker by Shri Sumit Saha, Proprietor of M/s.Skivvies Textile. 7. On perusal of the records and documents and considering the submissions made on behalf of parties, it is apparent that in the present case, the licence of CB was suspended under CB Order No.12/2019 dated 18.2.19. However, prior to the suspension, a Customs Broker Circular No.08/2019 dated 8.2.19 was issued in connection with the issue under consideration. The suspension was ordered by the Customs Authority on the basis of investigation report dated 31.1.19 issued by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Kolkata Zonal Unit with respect to one export consignment of M/s. Skivvies Textile wherein apparently, scrap leathers of very low value were attempted to be exported as Vegtan Leather Shoe Sole Components . The DRI Authority had intercepted the same and during the course of inve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... articipated in the investigation before the DRI Authority. After substantial period of time, on 18.2.19, there was no immediate necessity of suspension of the licence of the CB under Regulation 16 of CBLR, 2018. The Commissioner has also failed to adduce any reason of immediate necessity of exercising power under Regulation 16 of CBLR, 2018 in the impugned order. The Hon ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Rubee Air Freight Ltd. v/s CC (Airport Administration), Kolkata [2010 (257) ELT 20 (Cal)] at Para 3 held that, The power to suspend a licence is, however, drastic and entails irreversible civil consequences for the licencee. The power to suspend thus, ought to be exercised cautiously. 10. In the case of N.C. Singha Sons v/s. UOI [1998 (104) ELT 11 (Cal)], the Hon ble High Court, Calcutta has held that, That order, in our opinion, is not sustainable because it does not spell out that any immediate action is required to be taken in the matter nor does the order on its face indicate that such action was indeed warranted. [Para 6] 11. Also, in the case of East West Freight Carriers (P) Ltd. v/s. Collector of Customs, Madras [1995(77) ELT 79 (Mad)] the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... now well settled to the effect that the drastic provisions of suspension of a CHA licence under the Regulation 21(2) shall be used only when there is an immediate need for the same. It necessarily follows that if suspension is invoked after a long period of time, which in this case is over 95 days, then this by itself is demonstrative of the fact that there was no immediate necessity found. (3) We also find from a perusal of the order impugned that except for mention of an earlier alleged infringement done by the appellant, there is no other grounds spelt-out therein which compelled the Ld. Commissioner to suspend the said licence. In this connection, we find that once the Tribunal vide final order noted above had absolved the appellant of all wrong doings by setting aside the order, again before the Tribunal the Commissionerate cannot take this as a precedential value by holding that appellant had in the past committed any gross irregularity. If this view is not taken, then the very purpose behind the adjudication of the issue by the Tribunal would be lost. Therefore, if this be so, then the present allegation can only be treated as vague. (4) We are, therefore, of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
