2024 (12) TMI 477

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....use, Chennai, whereby the Principal Commissioner has ordered the "continuation of suspension of license issued under Regulation 16 (2) of Customs Broker Licensing Regulations (CBLR), 2018". 2. Heard Shri N. Viswanathan, Ld. Advocate for the appellants and Smt. O.M. Reena, Ld. Additional Commissioner for the respondent. 3. The contentions of Ld. Advocate are summarized below : The imports were in October and November 2022 wherein the violation/s were alleged, but the first order of suspension was passed on 23.04.2024 which itself is beyond the time frame provided under Regulation 17 of CBLR. The first show cause notice dt. 05.10.2023 issued under Regulation 17 (1) ibid does not whisper about any offence report. In the impugned order,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....entions and perused the documents placed on record. We find that the proceedings before the lower authorities is in a preliminary stage and hence, we do not propose to get into the merits of the case and give any finding on merits. Hence, the only issue that we could decide is, "whether the impugned order dt. 21.05.2024 whereby the continuation of suspension was ordered, is sustainable ?" 8. We find that only a few dates are relevant for our understanding. The dates of Bills of Entry / import is not coming out from the documents placed on record. However, para--3 of the SCN dt. 05.10.2023 indicates that during the course of investigation, statement of Ms. Starlina was recorded on 11.01.2023. The first show cause notice, as indicated above ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of licenses has only aggravated their misery. 11. We have very carefully gone through the documents made available before us by both the parties; the revenue may be having in its possession some documents/evidences regarding or indicating the history of similar violations by the appellants but, nevertheless, such infringements or violations has not culminated in any action by way of punishment as prescribed under the CBLR and hence, the alleged background/history stands not proved. Therefore, such a background or history of the appellants, as long as 'not proved' would not be of any avail or of any consequence insofar as the present - alleged violations are concerned. 12. It is not the intention of the legislature to jeopardize the busine....