TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (9) TMI 754
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on found that M/s.Sungrowth Exports Pvt.Ltd. had made fraudulent export of Readymade Garments to Russia under DEPB scheme. The said exporter had availed DEPB licence from DGFT. It is noticed that the name of the appellant was shown in the Bills of Export. The appellants Customs House Agent licence was suspended. The Tribunal by order dated 16.01.2006 set aside the suspension order. Thereafter the Commissioner of Customs, on the basis of the enquiry report, revoked the Customs House Agents licence, against which the present appeal is being filed. 3. The ld.Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that the entire proceeding was initiated in the gross violation of the time limit as prescribed in Regulation 22 of Customs House Agen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....statement from the Customs House Agent, or where no such statement has been received within the time-limit specified in the notice referred to in sub-regulation (1), direct the Deputy Commissioner of Customs or Assistant Commissioner of Customs to inquire into the grounds which are not admitted by the Customs House Agent. (3) The Deputy Commissioner of Customs or Assistant Commissioner of Customs shall, in the course of inquiry, consider such documentary evidence and take 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 co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y decision or order passed under regulation 20 or sub-regulation (7) of regulation 22, may prefer an appeal under section 129A of the Act to the Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal established under sub-section (1) of section 129 of the Act. 7. We find that the Tribunal in earlier occasion by Order No.FO/A/24/KOL/2006 dated 16.01.2006, set aside the suspension of the licence under Regulation 20(2) of Customs House Agents Licensing Regulation(CHALR), 2004. The relevant portion of the said decision is reproduced below:- 2. The appellantsmain contention is that the alleged offence i.e. export of consignment of sub-standard quality garments under drawback by one M/sSungrowth Exports Pvt.Ltd. took place in the year 2001-....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ellant in the present case was allowed to continue to act as CHA for the period of three years in which the case, it can be safely concluded that his continuation was not a danger to the Customs House. As such we are of the view that such suspension was not called for. We also note that the regular proceedings for cancellation of the licence has already been started by way of issuance of show-cause notice dated 22.6.05 under the provisions of CHA (LR) and reply has already been filed by the appellant. As such, we find no reasons to continue the suspension of the licence. The same is accordingly set aside and appeal is allowed. 8. The ld.Counsel for the appellant placed the list of dated as under:- Date Action Taken By the Licensing Auth....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the notice under Regulation 20(1) of Customs Brokers Licensing (Amendment) Regulations (CBLR), 2013. In the present case, the enquiry officer has taken 8(eight) months. Further, Regulation 20(7) provides that the Commissioner of Customs may pass the order within 90(ninety) days from the date of submission of the enquiry report. The ld.Counsel contended that the Regulation 20 prescribed the total time limit of 270(two hundred and seventy) days and 9(nine) months. But, in the present case, it has taken 24(twenty four) months. The Tribunal in the case of Hindustan Shipping Agency V. Commr. of Customs (Port), Kolkata [Final Order No.MO/75522/16 and FO/A/75763/2016 Dated 22.07.2016] on the identical issue allowed the appeal of the Customs Ho....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the CBLR, 2013 have replaced the CHA Regulations. The CHA regulations did not have any time limit to complete the proceedings. Therefore, by a circular 09/2010 dated 8.4.2010, the necessary to include a time limit for initiating action was addressed by the Board after filed inspection and by a notification dated 8.4.2010, amendments prescribing time period for initiating action and completing proceedings was made. The same was given effect by notification dated 20.01.2014. Whereas, under CBLR,2013 having found the necessity to prescribe a period, the Central Board, the statutory authority had included the same in Regulations itself, when they were brought into force. Therefore, when time limit is prescribed in Regulations, which empowers a....