Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2017 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (1) TMI 68 - AT - CustomsMaintainability of appeal - prohibition passed under Regulation 23 of the CBLR, 2013 - whether appeal before the Tribunal maintainable u/s 129A of the Customs Act, 1962? - Held that: - in CHALR, 2004 the remedy of filing appeal before the Tribunal was only against the order of revocation and suspension. However, the legislature very consciously brought amended provision by way of Regulation 21 in CBLR, 2013 that any order passed under CBLR, 2013 Regulation is appealable before the Tribunal under Section 129A - this appeal is clearly maintainable against the prohibition order. Validity of prohibition order - Held that: - the offence report was received on 11.03.2014. However after the lapse of more than two years there is no whisper regarding any proceeding of enquiry by the Department and the appellant is out of the job in three sections of the Mumbai Customs for more than two years. This Tribunal has been taking consistent view even in case of suspension of licence, that if the enquiry proceeding is not completed within stipulated time period of nine months, the suspension order was revoked and the CHA was allowed to operate - reliance was placed on the decision of the case of Bombay Shipping Agency Vs. Commissioner of Customs (General), Mumbai [2014 (3) TMI 317 - CESTAT MUMBAI],where it was held that when the Department is unable to complete it’s enquiry at given time of ten months, the Customs Broker should not be made suffer - the Department cannot be allowed to continue the prohibition on the appellant. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|