Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (6) TMI 658 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2016 (6) TMI 658 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - TMI - Revocation of CHA license - nature and scope of offence - gross violation of timeline of 90 days prescribed in Regulation 22(5) - Held that:- It may be observed that the time line in Regulation 19(2) of CBLR for passing the order after hearing is “preceded” by word “may” because of which Delhi High Court did not regard it to be mandatory while the time line in Regulation 22(5) is “preceded” by “shall” because of which Madras High Court held the same to .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

appellant was revoked in terms of the Regulation 22(7) of the Customs House Agent Licensing Regulations 2004 as amended and the amount of security was also forfeited. 2. The Ld. Advocate for the appellant made submissions on the merits of case to plead that offence of the appellant was not so grave as to warrant revocation of CHA license. However, we do not find it necessary to reproduce submissions on merit for reasons which will become evident in the following paragraphs. Ld. Advocate also pl .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ended that the appellant had grossly violated CHALR and therefore punishment is commensurate with the gravity of the offence. However, he admitted that there has been breach of the timeline prescribed in CHALR but added that as per the Delhi High Court judgment in the case of Burleigh International vs. CC 2016 (33) ELT 9(Del), the timelines prescribed under CHALR are not mandatory and therefore their breach is not fatal to the order . 4. We have considered the contentions of both sides. 5. At th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

er sub-Regulation 1 . It is evident from the aforesaid sub Regulation that the inquiry officer was required to submit his report within 90 days of the issuance of notice under Regulation 22(1). Thus, breach of time limit prescribed under Regulation 22(5) is clearly established. Madras High Court in the case of A M Ahmad (supra) in effect has clearly held that breach of the time limit prescribed in Regulation 22 is fatal to the order and set aside the order on that ground. As regards the judgment .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ne prescribed in regulation 22 of CHALR Regulation. 19(2) of CBLR and Regulation 22(5) of CHALR are reproduced below: 19(2) Where a licence is suspended under sub-regulation (1), the Commissioner of Customs shall, within fifteen days from the date of such suspension, give an opportunity of hearing to the Customs Broker whose licence is suspended and may pass such order as he deems fit either revoking the suspension or continuing it, as the case may be, within fifteen days from the date of hearin .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version