TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>CESTAT appeal allowed due to invalid license revocation - non-compliance with regulations</h1> <h3>M/s. A.P. Enterprises Versus The Commissioner Of Customs (General)</h3> M/s. A.P. Enterprises Versus The Commissioner Of Customs (General) - 2017 (352) E.L.T. 290 (Del.) Issues:1. Appeal against Final Order dated 17th October, 2016 passed by CESTAT.2. Compliance with Customs Broker Licensing Regulation, 2013.3. Validity of revocation of Customs Broker Licence.4. Jurisdiction of CESTAT in extending investigation time.Analysis:1. The appeal was filed against the Final Order dated 17th October, 2016 by CESTAT. The question framed for consideration was whether CESTAT erred in directing the Competent Authority to conclude the investigation and make a final decision contrary to the Customs Broker Licensing Regulation, 2013 (CBLR).2. The Appellant's Customs Broker Licence was suspended on 19th April, 2016, and later revoked on 1st June, 2016, without following the procedure outlined in CBLR 2013. The CESTAT directed the Competent Authority to conclude the investigation within three months. However, subsequent actions, including the issuance of a Show-Cause Notice (SCN) on 16th December, 2016, were found to be in violation of the time limits prescribed by CBLR 2013.3. The Court emphasized the importance of adhering to the time limits under CBLR 2013, highlighting that the SCN should have been issued within 90 days of the receipt of the 'offence report.' The failure to issue the SCN within the stipulated time rendered the revocation of the licence invalid. The CESTAT's extension of time for investigations was deemed without jurisdiction, and the revocation order was set aside.4. It was noted that the actions taken, including the revocation of the licence, were contrary to CBLR 2013 due to non-compliance with mandatory time limits. The Court found that the CESTAT's decision to extend the investigation time was invalid, leading to the setting aside of the impugned orders. The appeal was allowed, and no costs were imposed.This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the issues raised, the violations of the Customs Broker Licensing Regulation, 2013, and the ultimate decision of the Court in setting aside the orders due to non-compliance and lack of jurisdiction.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
