9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (6) TMI 783X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , refunds and other incentives, had been misappropriated by submission of purportedly bogus invoices from suppliers. 2. From the records of proceedings, it would appear that the primary role has been assigned to one Shri Mukul Gupta of M/s Dhairya International for whom a proxy organization, under the name and style of M/s Kajal Creations, was established by an ex-employee of the appellant herein. The notice dated 27th October 2020, issued under Customs Broker Licencing Regulations, 2018, culminated in order [ order-in-original no. 38/CAC/PCC(G)/PS/ CBS(Adj) dated 20th July 2021 ] of Principal Commissioner of Customs (General), Mumbai - I revoking the licence of the appellant herein and directing forfeiture of security deposit, both under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had been adequately explained and submitted that, with enquiry proceedings having taken less than 365 days from the receipt of the investigation report, all the delays are reasonable and, in the light of the order of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in Principal Commissioner of Customs (General) v. Unison Clearing Pvt Ltd [2018 (361) ELT 321 (Bom.)], condonable. 5. Before proceeding further, it would be appropriate to refer to the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay supra as both sides have relied upon it as supportive of their respective claims on adherence, or otherwise, with time-lines. It would appear that the Hon'ble High Court had been faced with a number of appeals filed by Commissioner of Customs (General), Mumbai against ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on whether the deviation from the time line prescribed in the Regulation, is "reasonable". This is the only way by which the provisions contained in Regulation 20 can be effectively implemented in the interest of both parties, namely, the Revenue and the Customs House Agent.' 6. It is seen from the impugned order that the licensing authority did take note of the contention of the appellant herein that the initiation of enquiry proceedings, as well as conclusion thereof, had been delayed to observe that '5.1 I find that inquiry Officer (10} has clearly staled the reasons for the delay in conducting the inquiry. In view of the above, I find that the delay has occurred in completion of inquiry proceedings due to non-submission of defence by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hich is of concern. Doubtlessly, the decision in re Unison Clearing Pvt Ltd has not affirmed that the time-lines are mandatory in every situation but, at the same time, there is no affirmation either that, irrespective of circumstances, it is only directory. 8. Thus, it was not for the licensing authority to cite the decision in re Unison Clearing Pvt Ltd for alienating the claim of the customs broker in the impugned proceedings that the delay which occurred had jeopardized the enquiry while refusing to submit to the binding nature of the decision insofar as subsequent delays were concerned. The appellant herein could not have been prescient to anticipate delay in concluding the proceedings. It was incumbent upon licencing authority to off ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
