Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2017 (5) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (5) TMI 545 - DELHI HIGH COURTRevocation of CHA licence - Did CESTAT in the facts and circumstances of this case fall into error in directing the Competent Authority to conclude the investigation and take a final decision in the inquiry, contrary to the Customs Broker Licensing Regulation, 2013 (CBLR), as interpreted by this Court in its various judgments? - The case of the Appellant is that despite repeated requests, the documents relied upon were not supplied. The Commissioner of Customs (General) by an order dated 1st June, 2016 proceeded to revoke the Appellant’s licence without following the procedure outlined under the CBLR 2013. Held that: - Regulation 20 (1) of the CBLR 2013 is categorical in that prior to revocation of the licence, a SCN in writing has to be issued to the Customs Broker. The SCN has to be issued within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of the 'offence report'. The SCN in the present case was issued only on 16th December 2016, more than six months after the revocation of the Appellant's licence. It was issued in fact after the impugned order dated 17th October, 2016 of the CESTAT - Unless the Department is able to show that there is a final report which is dated not later than 90 days prior to the SCN dated 16th December, 2016, there would be no compliance with the mandatory time limit set down under Regulation 20 (1) of CBLR 2013. Nowhere in the counter-affidavit is there a positive averment that a ‘final’ offence report was dated within the period of 90 days prior to 16th December 2016, when the SCN was issued to the Appellant for the first time. The entire action in proceeding to revoke the Appellant’s licence was contrary to CBLR 2013 - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|