Tribunal restores Customs Broker License, rejects forfeiture, extends CHA License validity.

The Tribunal set aside the revocation of the appellant's Customs Broker Licence, finding it unjustified, and restored the licence for ten years from the date of the order. The forfeiture of the security amount was also deemed unjustified and set aside. The appellant was not required to comply with certain regulations as they applied to new applicants, not existing licensees. The Tribunal directed the extension of the validity of the appellant's CHA Licence and rejected allegations of suppression of facts and submission of false documents. The pendency of criminal proceedings was not a valid reason for revocation, leading to the restoration of the appellant's licence.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Revocation of Customs Broker Licence (CB Licence)
2. Forfeiture of security amount
3. Compliance with Regulations 5(d) and 5(e) of CBLR 2013
4. Validity and renewal of CHA Licence
5. Alleged suppression of facts and submission of false documents
6. Pendency of criminal proceedings

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Revocation of Customs Broker Licence (CB Licence):
The appellant's CB Licence No. R-91/2006 was revoked by the Commissioner of Customs under the impugned order-in-original dated 30.03.2018. The appellant contended that the revocation was unauthorized and illegal. The Tribunal had previously set aside the revocation order dated 13.04.16, which should have led to the restoration of the CB Licence from the date it was suspended (15.12.2010). The Tribunal found that the appellant was not required to comply with Regulation 5 of CBLR 2014, as he was not a new applicant. The Tribunal concluded that the revocation was unjustified and restored the CB Licence for ten years from the date of the order.

2. Forfeiture of Security Amount:
The impugned order also included the forfeiture of the security amount of Rs. 75,000 furnished by the appellant. The Tribunal, upon setting aside the revocation of the CB Licence, also allowed the appeal with consequential relief, implying the forfeiture was unjustified.

3. Compliance with Regulations 5(d) and 5(e) of CBLR 2013:
The appellant was accused of violating Regulations 5(d) and 5(e) of CBLR 2013 by filing a false affidavit. The Tribunal found that these regulations apply to new applicants and not to existing licensees like the appellant. Therefore, the appellant was not required to file an affidavit under these regulations, and the insistence by the department was found to be unnecessary.

4. Validity and Renewal of CHA Licence:
The appellant's CHA Licence had expired during the pendency of the appeal. The Tribunal noted that the appellant had initially requested the restoration of the licence for the period lost due to suspension, not for its renewal. The Tribunal directed the respondent Commissioner to extend the validity of the CB Licence for ten years from the date of the order.

5. Alleged Suppression of Facts and Submission of False Documents:
The department alleged that the appellant suppressed facts and submitted false documents to secure the CB Licence. The Tribunal found that the facts regarding the appellant's involvement and the penalties imposed were known to the licensing authority. The Tribunal also noted that the appellant had not concealed any information and had complied with the department's requirements under protest.

6. Pendency of Criminal Proceedings:
The department cited the pendency of criminal proceedings against the appellant as a reason for revocation. The Tribunal referred to the judgment of the Calcutta High Court, which held that a CHA licence cannot be denied merely on the ground of pending criminal charges if the individual is not yet convicted. The Tribunal found that the department's actions were unjustified and restored the appellant's CB Licence.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal set aside the impugned order, restored the CB Licence for ten years, and directed the respondent Commissioner to implement the order within ten days. The appellant's appeal was allowed with consequential relief.

---