9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 326X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ich the Customs Broker License of the appellant has been revoked by exercising powers under regulation 14 of the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations, 2018 the 2018 Regulations for the reason that the appellant had connived with Kultar Singh and abetted illegal withdrawal of Duty Drawback by filing export documents on behalf of six non-existent firms, thereby knowingly aiding the export of overvalued 'Floor Coverings'. 2. The facts reveal that in the year 2014, the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence the DRI initiated investigation against 21 exporters who were exporting man-made floor coverings and were claiming duty drawback under Focus Product Scheme by allegedly resorting to over valuation and misdeclaration. 3. On 18.11.2014 DRI offi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... stoms Broker Licensing Regulations, 2013 the 2013 Regulations proposing revocation of the Customs Broker License of the appellant. 8. These show cause notices were challenged before the Delhi High Court in several writ petitions and the Delhi High Court, by judgement dated 24.05.2016, quashed the show cause notices on the ground that the offense report is actually the letter dated 16.02.2015 sent by DRI and not the show cause notices dated 24.09.2015 or 19.09.2015. Thus, as all the three show cause notices proposing revocation of the licenses were issued beyond the mandatory period of 90 days, they were found to be not sustainable in law. The relevant portion of the said judgment of the Delhi High Court in HLPL Global Logistics P. Ltd. vs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 20(1) of the CBLR, 2013 was not issued within ninety days after 18th February, 2015. xxxxxxxxx 14. Consequently, the Court is satisfied that as far as the W.P. (C) Nos. 1734, 2134 and 2135 of 2016 are concerned, the petitioner not having been issued the SCN within ninety days of receipt of the offence report by the Customs, the SCN dated 2nd February, 2016 issued to it by the Commissioner of Customs (General) is clearly unsustainable in law. The order dated 23rd March, 2015 confirming the suspension of the petitioner's CB licence cannot also be continued on account of the failure to issue the SCN and therefore, complete the enquiry within the time limit specified in Regulation 20. Consequently the said order dated 23rd March, 2015 is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Delhi High Court; (iii) As no other Shipping Bill had been filed by the appellant, the appellant cannot be treated as Customs House Agent. Hence, in respect of Shipping Bills, other than those pertaining to M/s. Dwarka Trading Company (which has already been set aside by the Delhi High Court), the appellant cannot be charged for violation of CBLR; and (iv) The appellant was denied an opportunity to cross examine the witnesses whose statements were relied upon to confirm the revocation of the license when it is mandatory under regulation 17(4) of CBLR, 2018 (erstwhile regulation 20(4) of CBLR, 2013) to give an opportunity to customs broker to cross examine the persons examined in support of the grounds forming the basis of proceedin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rized representatives appearing for the Department have been considered. 14. The records indicate that earlier the license of the appellant was suspended on 24.02.2015, which order was confirmed on 23.03.2015. This suspension order was challenged by the appellant before the Delhi High Court on the ground that though the offence report was submitted on 16.02.2015, the show cause notice was issued on 24.09.2015 much beyond the statutory period of ninety days contemplated under regulation 20(1) of the 2013 Regulations. The Delhi High Court held that since the show cause notice was not issued within the ninety days from the date of offence report i.e. 18.02.2015 it was not sustainable in law. The Delhi High Court, therefore, set aside the susp ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1.2020 treating the show cause notice dated 22.10.2019 as the offence report. The show cause notice dated 24.01.2020 proceeding to revoke the license of the appellant could not have treated the show cause notice dated 22.10.2019 as the offence report because the said show cause notice dated 22.10.2019 arises out of the offence report dated 16.02.2015. 20. It is also not disputed by the respondent that the appellant had filed only one Shipping Bill No. 5199084 dated 25.09.2014 in respect of M/s. Dwarka Trading Company and this Shipping Bill was considered in the earlier show cause notice dated 02.02.2016, which had been quashed by the Delhi High Court. No other Shipping Bill was submitted by the appellant and indeed none has been pointed ou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
