Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

Consequently, in the facts of the present case, the show-cause notice issued on June 23, 2017 cannot be said to be barred by limitation. The show-cause notice being within limitation, the authority acted within jurisdiction in issuing it and adjudicating thereon. The impugned order does not suffer for lack of jurisdiction. The third and the fourth issues are answered accordingly.

The show-cause notice dated June 23, 2017 was issued under the Regulations of 2004. The impugned order in original dated November 22, 2017 purports to notice the Regulations of 2013 and arrives at a finding that, the petitioner violated the provisions of Regulation 11(n) of the Regulations of 2013. It proceeds to revoke the licence granted to the petitioner and forfeits the security deposit furnished by it. Regulation 11 of the Regulations of 2013 lays down the obligations of a Customs Broker. Regulation 11(n) of the Regulations of 2013 requires a Customs Broker to verify antecedent, correctness of Importer Exporter Code (IEC) number, identity of his client and functioning of his client at the declared address by using reliable, independent, authentic documents, data or information. The Regulations of 2004 enumerates the obligation of a Customs House Agent in Regulation 13 thereof. Regulation 13(o) of the Regulation of 2004 contains the same provisions as that of Regulation 11(n) of the Regulations of 2013.