TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (1) TMI 440
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../w Regulation 20 of CBLR, 2013 for their violation to comply to the provisions of Regulation 11(d), 11(e), 11(f) and 11(g) of CBLR, 2013. After due process of law, the original authority dropped the proposal for revocation of license and forfeiting the security deposit, however, he imposed a penalty of Rs. 50,000/-. Aggrieved, the appellant is now before the Tribunal. 3. On behalf of the appellant, ld. counsel Shri Hari Radhakrishnan argued mainly on the technical ground that the show cause notice issued beyond 90 days as provided under Regulation 20 is unsustainable. He referred to the date chart and argued that the export consignment covered by Shipping Bill dated 19.9.2015 was granted let-export order and later called back by the SIIB (....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... not define or explain what is meant by an offence report. This being so, the date on which the department receives the knowledge regarding the offence has to be construed as the date of the offence report. In the present case, in para 18.2 of the impugned order, the Commissioner though admits that the show cause notice is issued beyond 90 days, holds that the same does not vitiate the proceedings, which is highly erroneous. In a catena of decisions, it has been held by various High Courts, time limit prescribed in Regulation 20 for issuing show cause notice has to be complied. 4. Against this, the ld. AR shri R. Subramaniyan reiterated the findings in the impugned order. 5. Heard both sides. 6. The only argument put forward by the ld. c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....graphs are reproduced as under:- "33. Furthermore, the Regulation CHALR, 2004 does not spell out what is an offence report and the manner in which it is to be sent and the appropriate / competent Authority to send the same. Added further, the Regulation 22 of the CHALR, 2004 speaks of procedure for suspending or Revoking License under Regulation 20 and in appropriate cases, the Regulation 20(2) of CHALR, 2004 empowers the Commissioner of Customs to Suspend the License of an Agent in appropriate case where immediate action is necessary. It cannot be gainsaid that Rule 22(3) specifies a time limit of 15 days. Further, it also determines the time limit enjoined under Regulation 22(5). 34. In the present case before this Court, the stand of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that date in the considered opinion of this Court. 7. In the case of Santon Shipping Services Vs. Commissioner of Customs, Tuticorin in CMA No. 730 of 2016, the Hon'ble High Court of Madras observed that the show cause notice is not issued within 90 days and the proceedings initiated under CHALR for revocation of licence is vitiated. The relevant portion of the order is reproduced below:- "15. The learned counsel for the appellant would further submit that, insofar as the case of the appellant is concerned, the DRI had sent offence report dated 21.09.2010, pursuant to which only, order of prohibition dated 30.09.2010 was passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Chennai, and the appellant s CHA licence was suspended on 04.10.2010 by the f....