TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 760X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... inquiry was closed by issue of order-sheet on 11th February 2014 but the inquiry officer chose to re-open inquiry for cross-examination of the partner of the licence-holder about six months later. The revocation was ordered almost thirty months after the search of the premises of the licencee. The appellant did participate in the proceedings. There is no justification for this delay that is so much at variance with the prescriptions in the Regulations. This compounds the casual manner in which the inquiry was conducted by placing reliance on statements that were recorded for purposes other than proceedings under the Regulations. The harsh penal consequence visited upon the appellant has compounded the disregard for deadlines prescribed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2013. Inquiry Officer submitted his report on 15 th December 2014 holding all articles of charge framed against the appellant to have been proved. 3. The charges against the appellant were that he had allowed his licence to be misused contrary to prohibition on sale or transfer of licence, failure to obtain authorization from company, firm or individual employing them, failure to advise client to comply with the provisions of the Act, failure to exercise due diligence to ascertain the correctness of information imparted to client, failure to discharge duties with utmost speed and efficiency and failure to verify the antecedent, correctness of the code, identity and veracity of at the specified address. The inquiry report was contested a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the inquiry report and in the findings of the adjudicating Commissioner. Much reliance has been placed on statements recorded under section 108 of Customs Act, 1962. Its evidentiary value in proceedings initiated in connection with investigation into smuggling has its worth. However, section 108, which reads thus 108. Power to summon persons to give evidence and produce documents. (1) Any gazetted officer of customs duly empowered by the Central Government in this behalf, shall have power to summon any person whose attendance he considers necessary either to give evidence or to produce a document or any other thing in any inquiry which such officer is making under this Act. (2) xxxxx (3) xxxxx (4) Every such inqu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s whose prescriptions lack the specificity of section 111 and 113 of Customs Act, 1962. The lack of acceptable, credible evidence to sustain the allegations is a taint on the proceedings. 6. Learned Counsel for appellant has drawn attention to the inordinate delay at various stages of the proceedings which, in view of the decision of the Tribunal in M/s Zen Cargo Movers Pvt Ltd v. Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi [2016-TIOL-524-CESTAT-DEL] , relying on other decisions, held thus 4 .The Hon ble High Court of Delhi in Shankar Clearing Forwarding vs. CC (Import General) - 2012 (283) ELT 349 (Del), the Hon ble Madras High Court in Sanco Trans Ltd vs. CC, Sea Port/Imports, Chennai - 2015 (322) ELT 170 (Mad) , this Tribunal in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issue of order-sheet on 11 th February 2014 but the inquiry officer chose to re-open inquiry for cross-examination of the partner of the licence-holder about six months later. The revocation was ordered almost thirty months after the search of the premises of the licencee. The appellant did participate in the proceedings. 9. There is no justification for this delay that is so much at variance with the prescriptions in the Regulations. This compounds the casual manner in which the inquiry was conducted by placing reliance on statements that were recorded for purposes other than proceedings under the Regulations. The harsh penal consequence visited upon the appellant has compounded the disregard for deadlines prescribed in the Regulations ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
