9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Revocation of temporary license under Regulation 21(1) of CHALR, 1984 due to violation of Regulation 14(b) by allowing unauthorized use of license for pecuniary consideration. Analysis: The appeal was filed against the revocation of the temporary license and appropriation of security amount by the Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi. The initial license granted to the appellants was extended for six months to allow them to qualify the Regulation-9 exam of CHALR, 1984. However, during an investigation, it was found that another entity was using the license of the appellants without authorization, leading to a show cause notice for violation of Regulation 14(b) of CHALR, 1984. An Inquiry Officer's report confirmed that the appellants allowed unauthorized use of their license for a fee of Rs. 500 per shipping bill. The Commissioner initially revoked the license based on this report, which was later set aside by the Tribunal for de novo proceedings and cross-examination of witnesses. A subsequent Inquiry Officer's report stated that while the appellants violated Regulation 14(b), they were not involved in the fraud of over-invoicing and short shipment. The Commissioner, after reviewing the evidence, passed the impugned order revoking the license. The appellants argued that there was insufficient evidence to prove the violation of Regulation 14(b), while the SDR supported the correctness of the Commissioner's order. The Tribunal noted that the Inquiry Officer's findings were based on the unauthorized use of the license by another entity for a fee, which the appellants allowed. Despite not being involved in the fraud directly, the appellants breached Regulation 14 of CHALR, 1984 by permitting unauthorized use of their license. Additionally, the temporary license had expired before the impugned order, rendering any renewal or extension rights void. Therefore, the Commissioner was within rights to terminate the proceedings without a specific revocation order. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as lacking merit. In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the revocation of the temporary license due to the appellants' violation of Regulation 14(b) by allowing unauthorized use of their license for a fee, despite not being directly involved in the fraud. The expiry of the temporary license further supported the dismissal of the appeal.
|
