Revoking Suspension Of Customs Broker Licence Can't Restrict Dept. From Inquiring For Imposition Of Penalty: Delhi High Court
The Delhi High Court has held that the revoking suspension of license cannot restrict the customs department from inquiring for imposition of penalty.
The bench of Justice Yashwant Varma and Justice Ravinder Dudeja has observed that the mere fact that the suspension of license had come to be revoked cannot possibly be viewed as restricting the respondents from proceeding further in accordance with Regulation 17 of the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations, 2018. As is manifest from the provisions made for the suspension of license, it is liable to be invoked where the authorities are of the opinion that immediate action is warranted.
As per Regulation 17, the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner of Customs may impose a penalty not exceeding fifty thousand rupees on a Customs Broker or F card holder who contravenes any provisions of these regulations or who fails to comply with any provision of the regulations.
The assessee submitted that although the license of the appellant had been initially suspended, the suspension subsequently came to be revoked by an order of 9 March 2017. In the absence of any new or fresh material having been gathered in the course of the inquiry which was undertaken under the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations, 2018, the imposition of penalty was unjustified.
The petitioner/assessee has filed the appeal under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962, questioning the correctness of the decision rendered by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT). The CESTAT affirmed the view taken by the Commissioner of Customs, who finally absolved the appellant from the spectre of revocation of license and confined the penal action to the imposition of a penalty of INR 50,000.
The CESTAT found that the Commissioner had taken a balanced view in the matter and desisted from proceeding to revoke the license of the appellant, which otherwise would have been warranted. It appears that in order to balance the equities, the Commissioner ultimately came to the conclusion that a forfeiture of the security deposit and the imposition of a penalty of INR 50,000/- would suffice.
The court, while dismissing the appeal of the assessee, held that merely because the suspension of that license was revoked, the same would not interdict the conclusion of the inquiry for imposition of penalty as contemplated in terms of Regulation 17.
Counsel For Appellant: Ashutosh
Counsel For Respondent: Arunima Dwivedi
Case Title: Vijendra Singh Versus Commissioner Of Customs
Case No.: CUSAA 63/2024