9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 888X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... port of a Pajero Car, their license was suspended for one month with effect from 1.7.2013 along with forfeiture of the security furnished by the said CHA. On completion of the suspension period of one month, the appellant approached the Revenue for renewal of his CHA license on furnishing a fresh security of Rs. 75,000/-. In the meanwhile, the old CHA Licensing Regulations, 2004 were superseded by the new Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations 2013 (hereinafter referred to CBLR, 2013). In terms of the new provisions of CBLR 2013, the security required to be deposited for a customs broker license was to the tune of Rs. 5 lakhs which was to be provided either by a Bank Guarantee or postal security or by way of National Saving Certificate. When ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e old security amount which would be applicable, his license was further suspended on 26.11.2013 in terms of Regulations 19(1) of the CBLR 2013. After post decisional hearing, the Commissioner vide his Order-in-Original No.30/2013 dated 20.12.2013 ordered for continued suspension, pending completion of the procedure under the new Regulations. 2.1 Subsequently an inquiry officer was appointed in terms of Regulation 20(1) of CBLR 2013, who submitted his report on 8.3.2014 holding that as the appellant has not complied with the directions of the Commissioner to submit new security to the extent of Rs. 5 lakh and inasmuch as the said non-action on the part of the broker was intentional, there is violation of the provisions of CBLR 2013. 2.2 T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... insisting that since his license was issued in terms of the old Regulations requiring security of Rs. 75,000/-, the Revenue was of the view that as the same is being renewed after completion of the suspension period, the appellant is required to give security of Rs. 5 lakhs in terms of new CBLR. Lot of correspondences was exchanged between the appellant and the department ultimately leading to passing of an order by the Commissioner vide which license suspension was ordered and continued. The said suspension order was challenged by the appellant before the Tribunal, which did not agree with his view point and held that security of Rs. 5 lakhs has to be given by the appellant. In compliance to the order of the Tribunal, the appellant submit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt of security in terms of the new Regulations. The question is as to whether such conduct of the appellant in not accepting the Revenue's direction and challenging the same before the higher appellate forum can be considered to be a misconduct on his part as Custom Broker License holder so as to revoke his license. The answer to such a question, by any reasonable prudent man would be emphatic "NO". Appellant's license which has already been renewed by Commissioner himself till 2021 cannot be revoked on this sole ground that instead of accepting the directions of the Commissioner, the appellant has chosen to file an appeal before the Tribunal. As such, we find no merits in the impugned order of the Commissioner revoking the appellan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
