Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2019 (1) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (1) TMI 384 - HC - CustomsRevocation of CHA license - time limitation for issuance of SCN - relevant date of filing Offence report - Maintainability of petition - alternative appellate remedy against the order under Regulation 22(7) of the CHALR 2004 - Held that:- Though normally, the writ court would not interfere with the issuance of show cause notice, as per the judgment of the Apex Court in UOI vs. Vicco Laboratories [2007 (11) TMI 21 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA], where a show cause notice is issued either without jurisdiction or in abuse of process of law, the writ court can interfere with the same. In the present case, perusal of Customs House Agents Licencing Regulations 2004 discloses that Regulation 20(1) of the CHALR 2004 provides for revocation of CHA licence granted to a CHA company after following the procedure prescribed under Regulation 22. Regulation 20(2) r/w 20(3) provides for immediate suspension of licence without following the procedures prescribed under Regulation 22. The proceeding under Regulation 20(1) and Regulation 20(2) are independent of one another by virtue of the non-obstante clause in Regulation 20(2). According to the petitioner, when any action is proposed under Regulation 20(1), then procedures prescribed under clauses (1) to (8) of Regulation 22 has to be necessarily followed and as per Regulation 22(1), the Commissioner of Customs shall issue a notice in writing to the Custom House Agent within 90 days from the date of receipt of offence report. In the present case also, the offence report was dated August 2010 and admittedly, the impugned show cause notice was issued only 18.12.2012 and therefore, there can be no doubt that the said show cause notice was issued well beyond the period of limitation of 90 days as per Regulation 22(1) of CHALR 2004 and therefore, the writ petition is maintainable - petition allowed.
|