TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (9) TMI 715
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t : Mr. M.P. Sharma a/w. Mr. Abhishek R. Mishra. For the Respondent : Mr. Bharat Raichandani (through V.C.) a/w. Mr. Prathamesh Gargate i/b. UBR Legal. P.C. : 1. The appeal impugns an order dated 23rd September 2022 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai (CESTAT). By the said order, the CESTAT observed that CESTAT had in the earlier round of litigation betwe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... imposed on the Respondent on account of Failure of Customs Broker to comply with Regulations 13(d), 13(e) and 13(0) of CHALR, 2004? (B) Whether, on the basis of facts and circumstances of the case, the purported delay in Inquiry Proceedings in light of CESTAT Order dated 15th December 2011 vitiates the Order-in-Original dated 24th October 2019? (C) Whether, on the basis of facts and circums....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s order dated 24th March 2011, while disposing the appeal, the CESTAT passed the following order : xxxxxxxxxxxxxx As contended by the learned Counsel for the Appellant that their CHA licence was suspended on 24.03.2011 and thereafter they were given a personal hearing on 18.05.2011 and their suspension was confirmed on 26.07.2011 and thereafter no proceedings were initiated under Regulation 22 ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s has been done despite a clear direction to restore respondent's license in the event of Department's failure to conclude the inquiry within three months of receipt of the CESTAT order passed on 15th December 2011. The CESTAT has held as under : xxxxxxxxxxxxxx In the instant case the proceeding against the Appellant was not concluded at the first instance within the time limit prescribed for ....