Requirement of notice before de novo inquiry by senior authority in customs broker licensing, failure voids revocation order.

Requirement that a senior authority must put a party on notice before undertaking a de novo inquiry or re-examination of an Inquiry Officers findings under the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations, 2013; failure to accord principles of natural justice by not giving such notice renders the impugned revocation order procedurally infirm and liable to be set aside. The review by the Commissioner cannot merely reiterate show cause allegations without independent evidence; absence of adherence to the proviso to Regulation 20(7) and denial of opportunity vitiated the order and led to its quashing.

---

---

Issues: Whether the penalty of Rs.50,000 imposed on the Customs Broker under Regulation 18 read with Regulation 20 of the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations, 2013 is legally sustainable where the Commissioner rejected the Inquiry Officer's report and levied penalty without giving notice as required by Regulation 20(7).

Analysis: The Tribunal examined whether the Commissioner, after disagreeing with the Inquiry Officer's report, complied with the procedural requirement to put the licensee on notice before proceeding to re-examine the allegations and impose penalty. The relevant regulatory framework comprises Regulations 11(d), 11(n), 18, 19(1), 19(2) and 20 (including Regulation 20(7)) of the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations, 2013 which govern conduct, suspension, inquiry and disciplinary action against customs brokers. The Inquiry Officer had found no violation; the Commissioner chose to re-open and decide the matter afresh but did not communicate his disagreement or give the appellant an opportunity to respond as contemplated by Regulation 20(7) and the principles of natural justice. The impugned Order-in-Original merely reiterated the allegations in the show cause notice without adducing fresh evidence or following the notice and hearing requirement recognized by the Tribunal and the High Court decisions relied upon.

Conclusion: The impugned order imposing penalty is set aside for failure to follow the procedural notice requirement and breach of principles of natural justice; the appeal is allowed in favour of the appellant.

---