New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (10) TMI 445 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2016 (10) TMI 445 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - TMI - Revocation of CHA licence - forfeiture of security deposit - readymade garments - DEPB benefits - violation of the provisions of Regulation 18 (a), (d) (o) and Regulation 19 (8) of Custom House Agent Licencing Regulation (CHALR), 2004 - time limit prescribed for following the procedures - Held that: - the time limits prescribed under the Regulations are to be followed mandatorily in exercising the powers. The decision in the case of Atharva Global Log .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

cial) And Shri B. Ravichandran, Member (Technical) Shri Pragyan Sharma and Sumit Wadhwa, Advocates for the appellant Shri K. Poddar, Authorized Representative (DR) for the Respondent ORDER Per. B. Ravichandran :- The appellant is a licenced Customs House Agent engaged in clearance of cargo through customs. The appeal is against order dated 01/3/2016 of Commissioner of Customs (General), New Delhi revoking the licence issued to the appellant. He also forfeited the security amount of ₹ 75,00 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on of licence is without any authority of law and the appellant have a very strong case on merits. However, he took preliminary objection on the sustainability of the order of revocation on the legal ground of licencing authority not adhering to the mandatory time limits prescribed under CHALR, 2004. He submitted that the show cause notice under Customs Act, 1962 was issued on 16/3/2011 based on the investigation conducted by DRI. The appellants were also issued notice for penal action. Subseque .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tice under CHALR 2004 was issued on 18/1/2013. An Inquiry Officer was appointed who submitted his report on 02/12/2015, thereafter the present impugned order was passed on 01/3/2016. As can be seen that the show cause notice issued on 14/1/2013 was decided only on 01/3/2016 after a gap of more than three years. The enquiry report was submitted after more than 2 years and 10 months. The learned Counsel submitted that now it is well settled legal position that the time limit prescribed under CHALR .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ectly in terms of the said regulations. Regarding the time limit prescribed he submitted that the same has been followed by the lower Authority except for a delay in submission of enquiry report. This has happened due to a change in the Inquiry Officer and as such no benefit should accrue to the appellant on account of this delay. 4. We have heard both the sides and examined the appeal records. We find that the issue of legal sanctity of time limit prescribed under CHALR 2004 has been examined a .....

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