TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (6) TMI 782
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rade Policy) on removal of imported goods, against 111 bills of entry between 2003-04 and 2005-06, by M/s Akshay Exports from the 'private bonded warehouse' in which these had been deposited. Considering the pleas made during the hearing, we do not propose to go into the details of the proceedings, involving the said importer and others including, as facilitating customs broker, the appellant before us, under Customs Act, 1962; more so, as the adjudication therein has been separately dealt with by the Tribunal vide order no. A/87161-87164/2019 dated 30th September 2019 upon challenge mounted against order-in-original no. Belapur/02- 03/Taloja/R-V/SLM/Commr/2012-13/Bel/937 dated 11th June 2017 of Commissioner of Central Excise, Belapur. It suffices to merely take note that the appeal of the customs broker against imposition of penalty of Rs. 10,00,000 and of Rs. 25,00,000 by the authority adjudicating two notices dated 13th March 2009 and 11th March 2010 was allowed by the Tribunal in entirety. 2. Learned Counsel for appellant submits that, in the meanwhile, the licencing authority, taking note of the proceedings under Customs Act, 1962 commenced by the two notices supra, initiated....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....-requisite for commencement of proceedings. He points out that the notice under regulation no. 17 of Customs Broker Licencing Regulations, 2018 having been issued in January 2020, with reference to the show cause notices of 2009 and 2010 pertaining to violations of Customs Act, 1962 in clearances effected between 2003-04 and 2005-06 that were adjudicated by common order dated 11th June 2017, despite those very developments having been erased, in relation to the appellant herein, out of existence with effect from the order of the Tribunal dated 30th September 2019. He informed that this plea made before the inquiry authority, as well as licencing authority, had been brushed aside as attempt at obstruction of process by imputing non-adherence to timelines that was attributable to difficulty in securing documents. Reliance was placed by Learned Counsel on the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Necko Freight Forwarders Ltd v. Commissioner of Customs (General) [2018 (360) ELT 879 (Del)] in support of this submission. 5. He further contends that the disagreement noted by the licencing authority on the dropping of three charges of breach of obligation was with intent to draw ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... other words, the proceedings were commenced without the metaphorical 'starter pistol' and thus renders the subsequent inquiry and impugned order to be stillborn. 9. In re Necko Freight Forwarders Ltd, the nature of 'offence report' was considered at length and, though in the context of suspension of licence and its consequences, its relevance not only as the marker for prescribed deadlines in the process but also for the commencement of proceedings has been highlighted thus '15. The expression 'offence report' has not been defined. However, it is apparent that the same must mean a report indicating that an offence has been committed by the Customs Broker. This is also how the said term has been understood by the authorities. The expression 'offence report' was also used in Regulation 22(1) of CHALR, 2004. In terms of the said sub-regulation, the Commissioner of Customs was required to issue a notice within 90 days of the receipt of an offence report, indicating the grounds on which the License of a Customs House Agent was proposed to be revoked/suspended. The Central Board of Excise and Customs had issued a circular (Circular No. 9/2010-Cus., dated 8-4-2010) in regard to certai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....thority. 10. We may do worse than dwelling awhile on the significance of the 'offence report' in the procedure for revocation of licences. Customs brokers are intermediaries established under, and recognized by, section 146 of Customs Act, 1962. Its criticality is manifest in the enactment of this special provision within the taxing statute for enabling the Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs to structure the framework for the existence and control of such brokers through Regulations. The citing of the approval accorded by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Commissioner of Customs v. KM Ganatra & Co [(2016) 4 SCC 697]to the observation of the Tribunal in Noble Agency v. Commissioner of Customs [2012 (142) ELT 84 (Tri)] thus ''15. In this regard, Ms. Mohana, learned senior counsel for the appellant, has placed reliance on the decision in Noble Agency v. Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai [2002 (142) ELT 84 (Tri. - Mumbai)] wherein a Division Bench of the CEGAT, West Zonal Bench, Mumbai has observed :- "The CHA occupies a very important position in the Customs House. The Customs procedures are complicated. The importers have to deal with a multiplicity of agencies viz. carri....