conditions under Regulation 5, ibid. Further the responsibilities of the CCSP are mentioned at Regulation 6, ibid. I find that the custodianship would have been issued to CCSP i.e. after the satisfaction of all the conditions prescribed in Regulation 5. The CCSP has applied for renewal of the custodianship. In the meantime, as per the directions of CBIC, the Customs has conducted audit of the ICDs and CFSs, the appellant (CCSP) was also audited. On audit, the Customs have noticed discrepancies/short comings/ non adherence in the working of the CCSP and based on that a show-cause was issued and adjudicated by the learned Commissioner. I find that the issues raised by the Customs in the show-cause notice and thereafter adjudicated by the learned Commissioner mostly pertain to the conditions mentioned in Regulation 5. I find that when the custodianship is issued under Regulation 10, the Customs would have ensured that all the conditions mentioned in Regulation 5 are met with by the prospective CCSP i.e., the appellant. Therefore, I find that the issues raised by the Customs on audit of the appellant-custodian pertained to the conditions mentioned in Regulation 5 and the discrepancies were found at the time of renewal could be because of certain new requirements, which should have arisen between the period of issue of custodianship and the application for renewal. The appellant has submitted that they could not attend to the issues raised by the Customs due to shortage of labour during the Covid-19 Pandemic. They have also mentioned in their submissions that they could attend to some of the issues and rest of the issues remaining would be attended to in due course and that there is no willful act on their part not to attend to the issues raised by the Customs. They have also submitted that the issues raised for which they have been
