2016 (2) TMI 139

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t arguing the issue on merit but only the issue of non-observance of the time lines prescribed in the CHA Licensing Regulations, 2004 adding that the show cause notice in this case was issued on 17.7.2013 while the enquiry report was submitted on 26.6.2015 which was beyond the time period prescribed in Regulation 22 of the said Regulations, and that such violation of the prescribed time limit makes the impugned order unsustainable. 3. The ld. DR, on the other hand stated the said time lines are essentially directory in nature and therefore violation thereof would not be fatal to the impugned order. 4. We have considered the contentions of both sides. The issue involves is violation of the time lines prescribed in Regulation 22 of the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... such oral evidence as may be relevant or material to the inquiry in regard to the grounds forming the basis of the proceedings, and he may also put any question to any person tendering evidence for or against the Customs House Agent, for the purpose of ascertaining the correct position. (4) The Customs House Agent shall be entitled to cross-examine the persons examined in support of the grounds forming the basis of the proceedings, and where the Deputy Commissioner of Customs or Assistant Commissioner of Customs declines to examine any person on the grounds that his evidence is not relevant or material, he shall record his reasons in writing for so doing.  (5) At the conclusion of the inquiry, the Deputy Commissioner....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ording his findings within 90 days from the date of issue of a notice under sub-regulation (1). In the present case, the notice under sub-regulation (1) of Regulation 22 was issued on 17.7.2013 and the inquiry report by the Deputy Commissioner in terms of Regulation 22 (5) was submitted more than 22 months after that (on 26.6.2015). Sub-regulation (2) of Regulation 20 deals with suspension of licenses and therefore proviso to sub-regulation 1 of Regulation 22 has no relevance to the present proceedings. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Shankar Clearing & Forwarding vs. CC (Import & General) -2012 (283) ELT 349 (Del.), the Hon'ble Madras High Court in Sanco Trans Ltd. Vs. CC, Sea Port/Imports, Chennai - 2015 (322) ELT 170 (Mad.), this Trib....