Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2015 (11) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (11) TMI 380 - HC - CustomsRevocation of CHA License - forfeiture of the security - Imposition of penalty - Regulation 22 read with Regulation 20 of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013 - whether the principal commissioner or commissioner of customs, as the case may be, is bound to accept the inquiry report, if it is in favour of the Custom Broker or can he disagree with the same - Held that:- Inquiry report is in favour of the petitioner and exonerates him. Mere communication of the inquiry report, which is in favour of the petitioner and without communication of adverse material and/or reasons for difference, would not enable the petitioner to rebut, qualify or explain the adverse material and show cause against the proposed adverse action. Principles of natural justice required that before an adverse decision was taken against the petitioner, the petitioner should have been communicated the adverse material/reasons for disagreement. The fact that the reasons for disagreement were not communicated to the petitioner prior to the adverse decision being taken by the Commissioner of Customs, there was clearly a violation of principles of natural justice. The Commissioner of Customs should have recorded the reasons for disagreement and forwarded the same to the petitioner for his comments before passing the impugned order. Because of failure to do so, the impugned order is clearly in violation of the principles of natural justice. - impugned order cannot be sustained - commissioner to decide the matter afresh - Decided in favour of assessee.
|