9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 833X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ustom House Agents License by the respondent. The license has been renewed from time to time and had validity upto 10.02.2015. In the course of the petitioner's operation, it facilitates filing of bills of entry for its clients, for causing imports and shipping bills for its clients, for causing exports of tangible goods. On the strength of the license issued by the respondent, the petitioner was allowed to transact customs related work of its clients in the Port and Airport areas of the Commissionerate of Customs. In the course of the petitioner's business, it undertook Customs Clearance Work on behalf of various firms and individuals, who are importers, who are in the business of import of various goods. The petitioner concern han ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e obligations cast upon them under Regulation 13(b), 13(d) and 13(e) of the CHALR 2004 (now Regulation 11(b), 11(d) and 11(e) of Custom Broker Licensing Regulations, 2013). 4. On 25.06.2010, the petitioner was issued with a show cause notice and called upon to show cause as to why the license issued to them should not be cancelled or the security deposited by them forfeited under Regulation 20(1)(b) of the CHALR, 2004 for non-compliance of the obligations. The petitioner sent their reply and also participated in the enquiry proceedings. The Enquiry Officer filed his report dated 31.03.2013 before the respondent. The respondent, after considering the Enquiry Report, disagreed with the views of the Enquiry Officer and found that it is a fit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 17.05.2014. Again, the respondent gave an opportunity of personal hearing on 27.06.2014. Even on that day, the petitioner did not attend the personal hearing nor sent any communication to the respondent. From the submissions made by the respondent, it is clear that the reason for passing the impugned order after 90 days cannot be found fault with the respondent. Before the Enquiry Officer also, the petitioner participated in the enquiry proceedings and made their submissions. Inspite of the respondent granting three opportunities of personal hearing, the petitioner neither appeared for the personal hearing nor submitted any reply to the respondent, therefore, the contentions raised by the petitioner that the Writ Petition is maintainable in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
