TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 835X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ainst the petitioner. In such circumstances, to renew the licence of the petitioner for shorter periods would result in not only prejudice being caused to the petitioner, but also leading to multiplicity of proceedings, which definitely should not be at the behest of the Department. This writ petition is partly allowed by directing the first respondent to renew the petitioner's customs brokers licence for a period of two years with effect from 04.01.2018 onwards and pass orders to the said effect within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. - W.P.No.119 of 2018 & WMP No.169 of 2018 - - - Dated:- 4-1-2018 - T. S. Sivagnanam, J. For the Petitioner : Mr.R.Raghunathan For the Respondents : Mr.K.M ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the order is as follows: 6.In my view, the pendency of a show cause notice for adjudication that too for a period of three years cannot be a sole ground to grant temporary renewal to the petitioner. That apart, it is not known as to why the Officer, who had adjudicated the show cause and given a personal hearing on 21.06.2012, has not passed any orders on the petitioner's application. As already observed, merely because the petitioner has approached this Court seeking certain relief and the writ petition is pending does not mean that the petitioner is charged with a misconduct. Therefore, the reason assigned by the respondents in the counter affidavit for not granting renewal for a longer period and renewing the license temporarily ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... leared, ordered for confiscation of the containers with option to redeem on payment of redemption fine of ₹ 5,00,000/- and imposed penalty of ₹ 85,00,000/- on the petitioner. However, the importers were fully exonerated. 5.As against the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Customs (Appeals-II), who by order dated 25.09.2017, allowed the appeal in part by holding that the order of confiscation of the containers is bad and vacated the said order of confiscation and gave a small reprieve to the petitioner by reducing the penalty to ₹ 43,00,000/- from ₹ 85,00,000/-. Against the said order, the petitioner has filed a revision application before the Central Government under Section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Customs Act, 1962 invariably takes more than two years for it being disposed of, as there was a jurisdictional issue raised by the Delhi High Court and the revisional authority was held to have no jurisdiction to decide the revision petition. It appears that only recently officer of higher rank than that of the Commissioner of Customs has been nominated as the revisional authority and the matters are progressing. Therefore, under the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is atleast entitled for renewal of licence for a period of two years from 04.01.2018. 9.Accordingly, this writ petition is partly allowed by directing the first respondent to renew the petitioner's customs brokers licence for a period of two year ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
