2015 (3) TMI 243 - AT - Customs

Customs Tribunal Lifts License Suspension Due to Delayed Inquiry Process

BHUSHAN PORT WORLD Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (GENERAL), MUMBAI

The Tribunal found that despite prescribed time-limits, the Customs authorities had not completed the inquiry within the stipulated 9 months. ... Suspension of CHA licence - Non submission of copies requested by appellant - Non completion of enquiry proceedings - Held that:- As per the provisions of Regulation 20 of CBLR, 2013, time-limits have been prescribed for completing the enquiry proceedings. A time-limit of 90 days have been prescribed for issue of notice from the date of receipt of an offence report; another 30 days time has been given to the CHA to file reply to the notice; another 90 days time to the inquiry officer to complete the inquiry report; another 30 days for the CHA to make his submission against the inquiry report. Thus, overall a period of 9 months has been prescribed for completing the inquiry proceedings and passing of an order under the provisions of law. The CBEC also, vide Circular No. 9/2010 dated 08/04/2010 has reiterated that these time-limits should be adhered to. This Tribunal also in the case of Bombay Shipping Agency has held that, if the inquiry is not completed within the stipulated period, the suspension need not be continued. In spite of such time-limits prescribed, the Customs authorities have not taken up the matter with any seriousness. There is no provision in the CBLR, 2013 or in the authority. Inasmuch as 15 months has passed since the passing of the suspension order and the Customs authorities have not bothered to complete the inquiry within the stipulated period of 9 months, we are of the considered view that this suspension need not be continued and the CHA should be allowed to function in this capacity. However, the Customs authorities are at liberty to complete the inquiry proceedings as early as possible. - Appeal disposed of. Issues: Appeal against suspension of CHA license pending enquiry proceedings under CHALR 2004/CBLR 2013.Analysis:1. Issue of Delay in Enquiry Proceedings:The appellant challenged the suspension of the CHA license, citing delay in completing the enquiry proceedings. The appellant argued that despite the statutory time-limits prescribed under CHALR 2004 (now CBLR 2013) for completion of the inquiry proceedings, more than a year had passed since the suspension order without the enquiry being concluded. The appellant also highlighted that requested documents supporting the charges were not provided despite repeated requests. The appellant relied on a previous Tribunal decision in Bombay Spinning Agency vs. Commissioner of Customs (General), Mumbai to support the argument that suspensions should be set aside if inquiries are not completed within stipulated periods.2. Revenue's Argument and Tribunal's Analysis:The Revenue contended that the offence against the CHA was serious, justifying the continuation of the suspension. However, the Tribunal analyzed the provisions of CBLR 2013, particularly Regulation 20, which set time-limits for various stages of the enquiry process. The Tribunal noted that a total period of 9 months was prescribed for completing the inquiry proceedings and passing an order. Reference was also made to Circular No. 9/2010 emphasizing adherence to these time-limits. The Tribunal highlighted the importance of completing inquiries within the stipulated period and referred to a previous case where suspension was lifted due to delays in the inquiry process.3. Tribunal's Decision:After considering both parties' submissions and the legal framework, the Tribunal found that despite the prescribed time-limits, the Customs authorities had not completed the inquiry within the stipulated 9 months. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the suspension need not be continued and allowed the CHA to resume functioning. However, the Customs authorities were directed to expedite the completion of the inquiry proceedings. The appeal was disposed of accordingly.In summary, the Tribunal's judgment in this case focused on the delay in completing the enquiry proceedings against the CHA, emphasizing the importance of adhering to statutory time-limits. The decision highlighted the need for timely completion of inquiries and set aside the suspension, allowing the CHA to continue operating while directing the Customs authorities to expedite the inquiry process.