TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (12) TMI 1198
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... proceedings was issued beyond the period of limitation stipulated under the Customs Brokers License Regulation, 2013, both at the stage of issuing show cause notice as well as while passing the impugned order on receipt of the enquiry report. Therefore, it is contended that the impugned order passed beyond the period of limitation cannot be sustained for want of jurisdiction. 3. Mr.M.Viswanathan, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner's license was originally suspended on 10.11.2016 and the said suspension order was subsequently revoked on 06.01.2017. The offence report was made on 27.09.2016. However, the show cause notice was issued only on 02.03.2017 which is beyond 90 days from the date of receiving the o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mpugned order. 6. Heard both sides. 7. There is no dispute to the fact that the offence report was made ready on 27.09.2016 and communicated to the respondent. However, the show cause notice was issued only on 02.03.2017. At this juncture, Regulation 20(1) of the said regulation is relevant to be quoted as follows: "20. Procedure for revoking licence or imposing penalty. (1) The Commissioner of Customs shall issue a notice in writing to the Customs Broker within a period of ninety days from the date of receipt of an offence report, stating the grounds on which it is proposed to revoke the licence or impose penalty requiring the said Customs Broker to submit within thirty days to the Deputy Commissioner of Customs or Assistant Commissi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the date of knowledge gained by the Commissioner, by means of any communication, be it show cause notice or order-in-original, has to be construed as the date of receipt of the offence report. Otherwise, a report about anyone of the above 3 ingredients can be sent at any time, even after five years or ten years." (emphasis supplied) 8. Going by the date of receipt of the offence report and the date of issuance of the show cause notice, it is evident that the show cause notice issued was beyond the period of 90 days and thus, the same is in violation of Regulation 20(1) of the Customs Broker License Regulation, 2013. 9. The next contention raised by the petitioner is in respect of the limitation prescribed under Regulation 20(7) contemp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f issue of notice under Sub Regulation (1). It is contended by the respondents that the time stipulated under Regulation 20(5) for filing such report is only directory and not mandatory. The very same issue was considered by the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court in a case reported in 2016 (338) ELT 347 (Del), Impexnet Logistic vs Commissioner of Customs (General). The Delhi High Court at paragraph Nos. 6 to 10 has observed as follows: "6. From the list of dates submitted by the Respondent, it appears that an enquiry report dated 4th March, 2015 was forwarded by the Inquiry Officer only on 10th March 2015 which was 13 months after the suspension of the licence. It is thereafter that the impugned order dated 1st June, 2015 was passed a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n of CHA license, and for passing of an order by the Commissioner of Customs. Suitable changes have been made in the present time limit of forty five days for reply by CHA to the notice of suspension, sixty days time for representation against the report of AC/DC on the grounds not accepted by CHA, by reducing the time to thirty days in both the cases under the Regulations." 7. This Court has consistently emphasised the mandatory nature of the aforementioned time limits in several of its decisions. These include the decision in Schankar Clearing & Forwarding v. C.C. (Import & General) 2012 (283) E.L.T. 349 (Del.), the order dated 25th April, 2016 passed by this Court in Customs Appeal No. 14/2016 (Commissioner of Customs (General) v. S.K.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Del), Indair Carrier Pvt. Ltd vs Commissioner of Customs (General), has observed at paragraph No.42 as follows: "42. Once the limitation prescribed is mandatory, as has been declared by the courts of law, it cannot be stated that, because of the other issues, that is the merit of the case, this mandatory requirement of the limitation can be ignored." 10. Perusal of the above said decisions of this Court and the Delhi High Court would show that the time stipulated under the Regulations for issuing the show cause notice as well as the filing report is not directory and on the other hand, it is mandatory. No other contra decisions are placed before this Court by the learned counsel for the respondents. Even the decision, which he sought to....