Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2017 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (9) TMI 754 - AT - CustomsRevocation of CHA License - forfeiture of security deposit - time limit as prescribed in Regulation 22 of Customs House Agents Licensing Regulation(CHALR), 2004 - Held that: - Regulation 20(5) provides the preparation of report by the enquiry officer within 90 days from the date of issuance of the notice under Regulation 20(1) of Customs Brokers Licensing (Amendment) Regulations (CBLR), 2013. In the present case, the enquiry officer has taken 8 months - Further, Regulation 20(7) provides that the Commissioner of Customs may pass the order within 90 days from the date of submission of the enquiry report. But, in the present case, it has taken 24(twenty four) months. The Tribunal in the case of Hindustan Shipping Agency V. Commr. of Customs (Port), Kolkata [2016 (12) TMI 889 - CESTAT KOLKATA] on the identical issue allowed the appeal of the Customs House Agent and held that The time limit prescribed by law is mandatory and the appellant is not permitted to suffer. The legislature has prescribed the time limit for taking steps in each and every stage as prescribed in the sub-Regulations of Regulation 22. The Commissioner of Customs cannot ignore such time limit without assigning any reason or in an unusual situation. In the present case, there is no material on record for contravention of the provisions of the law. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|