9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (4) TMI 24X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a period of 30 days to the Deputy Commissioner of Customs or Assistant Commissioner of Customs nominated by him, a written statement of defence and also to specify in the said statement whether the customs broker desires to be heard in person before the Deputy commissioner of the Customs or the Assistant Commissioner of Customs. Admittedly in this case, the 90th day from the date of offence report dated 7.9.2016 would have expired on 06.12.2016 whereas the impugned show cause notice dated 31.11.2017. It was thus beyond the limitation prescribed under Regulation 20 of the Customs Broker Licensing Regulation, 2013. Petition allowed. - W.P.No.5119 of 2017 And W.M.P.Nos.24304 and 5415 of 2017 - - - Dated:- 18-3-2021 - Honourable Mr. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Logistics Pvt. Ltd., vs Commissioner of Customs, Chennai-VIII [2019 (367) E.L.T.200(Mad.)] ii) Indair Carrier Pvt. Ltd., vs Commissioner of Customs (General) [2016 (337) E.L.T.41 (Del)] iii) KTR Logistics Solutions Pvt. Ltd., vs Commissioner of Customs, Chennai [2020 (371) E.L.T.685(Mad.)] iv) Santon Shipping Service vs Commissioner of Customs [Manu/TN/3305/2017] v)Necko Freight Forwarders Ltd., vs Commissioner of Customs (General) [2018 (360) E.L.T.879 (Del.)] vi) Commissioner of Customs (Imports) vs A.M.Ahmed Co [W.A No.371 of 2015] vii) Gopal Agarwal vs Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi [2015 (326) E.L.T.593(Tri.-Del.)] viii) A.K.Impex vs Union of India [1991 (53) E.L.T.203 (Mad.)] ix) Sowparnika ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... misusing the IEC of others; and d) having known all these facts of the unscrupulous activities and the persons behind the modus-operandi, they have failed to bring it to the knowledge of the Customs Authorities. 5. Decision to suspend the license of the petitioner was taken under Section 19(1) of CBLR, 2013, on 12.09.2016 based on offence report received from the Mumbai Commissionerate by a fax received on 07.09.2016. 6. It is further submitted that on the same date the impugned show cause notice dated 31.01.2017 was issued Order in Original No.53233 of 2017 dated 31.01.2017 was also passed against the petitioner. Suspension of the license issued to the petitioner was revoked while continuing the prohibition order No.28 of 2016 dat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sioner of Customs or Assistant Commissioner of Customs, as the case may be, to inquire into the grounds which are not admitted by the Customs Broker. (3) The Deputy Commissioner of Customs or Assistant Commissioner of Customs, as the case may be, shall, in the course of inquiry, consider such documentary evidence and take such oral evidence as may be relevant or material to the inquiry in regard to the grounds forming the basis of the proceedings, and he may also put any question to any person tendering evidence for or against the Customs Broker, for the purpose of ascertaining the correct position. (4) The Customs Broker shall be entitled to cross-examine the persons examined in support of the grounds forming the basis of the proceed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssed unless an opportunity is given to the Customs Broker to be heard in person by the Commissioner of Customs. 9. Regulation 20 of the Customs Broker Regulation, 2013 makes it clear that the Commissioner of Customs shall issue a notice in writing to a customs broker within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of an offence report stating that the grounds on which it is proposed to revoke the license or impose penalty requiring a customs broker to submit within a period of 30 days to the Deputy Commissioner of Customs or Assistant Commissioner of Customs nominated by him, a written statement of defence and also to specify in the said statement whether the customs broker desires to be heard in person before the Deputy commissio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents. 9.Though the decision of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in Principal Commr. of CUS. Vs. Unioson clearing Pvt.Ltd., 2018 (361) E.L.T. 321 (DBBom), has given a different interpretation to the effect that the limitation prescribed in Regulation 20 of the Customs License Brokers Act, 2014 is directory and not mandatory, I am bound to follow the views taken by this Court in Santon Shipping Services Vs. The Commissioner of Customs and Another, 2017 SCC OnLine Mad 7084 and Masterstroke Freight Forwarders Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner, 2016 (332) E.L.T. 300 (Mad). 10.Since the Show Cause Notice dated 07.07.2014 wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
