TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (12) TMI 229
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed is connected, the appeals are taken up together for decision. The brief facts of the case are that the appellant, being a CHA, filed a Bill of Entry on 19.09.2012 on behalf of one importer M/s Avhyuvaya Impex, New Delhi. The goods were described as Cookware sets. On physical examination the consignment was found to be containing fire crackers concealed alongwith the declared goods. Proceedings were initiated against the appellant both under the Customs Act, 1962 and Custom House Agent Licensing Regulations, 2004 (CHALR, 2004)/ Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013 (CBLR, 2013). 2. The appellants were issued with a show cause notice for imposition of penalty under Customs Act, 1962 on 27.09.2013. On 06.12.2013 order for suspending ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is taken for reckoning the time limit for issue of show cause notice, the notice issued on 27.08.2014 is issued almost five months after the due date. Similarly, the inquiry report by the Deputy/ Assistant Commissioner is to be made within ninety days of issue of show cause notice. In the present case, there is a delay of three months after the time limit prescribed under the said Regulation. There is also a delay in issuing the impugned order of revocation which is beyond ninety days of submission of inquiry report. 5. The impugned order also dealt with the question of time bar as pleaded by appellant. Ld. Commissioner stated that the decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of A. M. Ahamed & Co. vs. Commissioner of Customs (....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....th powers of Government of India to extent the imposition of anti-dumping duty after the expiry period. The Hon'ble High Court was dealing with entirely different set of legal provisions and facts and circumstances. We find the Hon'ble High Court decision in A. M. Ahamed & Co. (supra) is directly dealing with CBLR and the legal sanctity of time limit prescribed under the Regulations. As such, we find the order of the lower authority which was issued without adhering to the time schedule in every stage is liable to be set-aside on this ground. 7. Further, we find that the original authority agreed with the appellant's submission that the inquiry report in its entirety is a verbatim repetition of show cause notice issued under Cu....