2025 (10) TMI 554

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rms of regulation 20(1) read with regulation 22 of Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 2004 (now regulation 18 read with regulation 20 of CBLR, 2013). 2. The brief facts of the case are that the appellants are Customs House Agents, holding CHA License valid up to 24.02.2017 issued under Regulation 10(1) of Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations (CHALR), 1984 and were permitted to transact Customs Clearance work in the jurisdiction of Mumbai Customs Zone, under Regulation 9(2) of CHALR, 2004. The Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai vide letter dt.13.02.2013, forwarded a letter dt.01.02.2013 of the CC (Export), Mumbai, wherein ti was proposed to initiate disciplinary action against the Customs Broker on the ground that duri....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....revoked the license and forfeited the security amount deposited in terms of regulation 20(1) read with regulation 22 of CHALR, 2004. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellants preferred the present appeal before this Tribunal. 3.1 Learned Advocate for the Appellant submitted that the adjudicating authority has come to the conclusion based on prohibition order, show cause notice, inquiry report and other material evidence without considering the facts and circumstances and procedures followed in the clearance of imports. 3.2 Further, as per SCN and the Proposal for action against CHA vide letter dt.01.01.2013, there was no action initiated against the exporters or the persons involved in the case to establish whether the CHA/CB is involve....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ted that the finding of the adjudicating authority that the appellants have knowingly allowed some unauthorized persons to handle the export clearance work is totally unfair and knowingly misplacing the procedures followed in the Customs Houses to involve the CB in this case is incorrect. 3.6 It is further submitted that the violation of regulations mentioned in the impugned order are applicable if the CHA/CB attended the examination of goods and other work pertaining to export of goods. In this case, the CHA/CB has not attended any of the work and the goods were customs cleared. Therefore, the finding of the adjudicating authority in regard to violation of obligations under Regulation 13(a), 13(b), 13(d), 13(n), 13(o), 17(2), 19(5) and 19....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....oker and the impugned order imposing penalty is set aside. The facts of the instant appeal are quite similar and therefore, the findings in the above case are applicable in the present appeal also. 7. We further find that learned Counsel has argued that license of CHA has already been revoked and there is no provision to revoke the same again. He has relied on the decision of Coordinate Bench at Mumbai in the case of Suswashis Clearing and Forwarding Agency Vs Pr. CC (Gen.), Mumbai (supra), wherein, it was held as under: "7.2 ........................ There is no express legal provision, for revocation of a CB license, that is already revoked by an earlier order issued under Regulation 17(7) ibid. In other words, there can be only one ord....