TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (12) TMI 1252
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd further inquiry proceedings based on the same and quash the same. 2. It is submitted that Petitioner is an Authorised Customs Broker holding a Customs Broker Licence No.TUT-09/2019 (Old No.TUT-01/2015) issued by the Commissioner of Customs, Tuticorin and transacting business at Chennai, Bangalore and Nellore Customs based on the licence issued at Tuticorin. It is submitted that a Joint surprise check was conducted by Central Bureau of Investigation, Anti Corruption Bureau, Chennai at Calyx Container Terminals Private Limited, Kathirvedu Village, Chennai on 30.08.2019, on the basis of certain allegations of corruption against a Customs Appraiser, by name, V.Sangamithra viz., the Officer is demanding and accepting undue advantage from Cus....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to show cause and directed to appear for personal hearing before the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, who was appointed as Inquiry Officer to conduct the inquiry. 4. The Petitioner submitted a detailed representation before the Inquiry Officer inter alia stating that proceedings initiated under CBLR are premature and before conducting and taking any action, Respondents must await for the outcome of the proceedings initiated before VIII Principal Special Judge for CBI Cases, Chennai. It was submitted that Petitioner firm should be granted permission to cross-examine the Investigating Officer, employee and also the customs officials under Regulation 17(4) of the CBLR. 5. It is submitted that the above request came to be rejected by the R....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....artmental proceedings initiated under CBLR need not be kept in abeyance until the disposal of the criminal proceedings. 9. It appears that the request for cross examination has been rejected by giving reasons that are vague in terms of Regulation 17 of CBLR, which sets out the procedure for revoking licence or imposing penalty. In this regard, reliance was sought to be made on Regulation 17(1) to 17(4) of CBLR, which reads as under: "17. Procedure for revoking license or imposing penalty- (1)The Principal Commissioner or 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 lice....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....amine any person on the grounds that his evidence is not relevant or material, he shall record his reasons in writing for so doing." On reading of the above Regulation it appears that if a request for cross-examination is made, the appropriate authority ought to examine that request and enable cross-examination and shall decline permission only after recording the reasons. The impugned proceedings rejects the request on the premise that there is no absolute right of cross-examination as there is corroborative evidence, the same appears to be vague inasmuch as what is the corroborative evidence that is available has not been set out, except for a mere assertion, there is no details set out in support thereof. 10. In the circumstances, this....