2012 (5) TMI 385 - AT - Customs

Suspension of CHA licence - nearly three years ago contemplating inquiry against the CHA, there is no progress of inquiry against the appellant and, consequently, the appellant remains without livelihood Held that - appellant has not been able to carry on the business of CHA for nearly three years on account of the impugned suspension order of the Commissioner. Though an inquiry officer was appointed by the Commissioner in August 2009, it appears, he is yet to initiate action. It is also unfortunate that no post-decisional hearing was given to this party by the learned Commissioner after keeping them under ex parte suspension order for nearly three years, suspension order against the present appellant is liable to be revoked. It is ordered accordingly, appeal is allowed

Summary

Issues involved:
Appeal against suspension of Customs House Agent (CHA) license under Regulation 20(2) of the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 2004.

Analysis:
The judgment deals with appeals by Customs House Agents (CHAs) against the suspension of their licenses. The first issue addressed is the withdrawal of appeals by two CHAs, as their license suspensions had been revoked. The remaining appeal was filed by M.M. Clearing against the suspension of their CHA license. The appellant argued that despite the suspension three years ago, no progress was made in the inquiry against them, leaving them without livelihood. They highlighted delays in the inquiry process, lack of post-decisional hearing, and cited similar cases where suspensions were revoked due to departmental delays. Reference was made to specific orders and a High Court judgment supporting their plea.

The judgment notes that the suspension was based on suspicion of involvement in undervaluation of imported goods handled by an ex-employee of the CHA. The appellant's counsel presented details of relevant Bills of Entry to support their case. The Tribunal observed common factual backgrounds in this case and similar cases of other CHAs, involving investigations into undervaluation of goods and evasion of customs duty. It was highlighted that inquiry officers were appointed in all cases but made no progress, leading to appeals to the Tribunal. The suspension orders of other CHAs were revoked due to departmental delays, which was deemed relevant to the case of M.M. Clearing. The appellant had been unable to operate as a CHA for nearly three years due to the suspension.

The judgment also noted that show-cause notices were issued to importers and CHAs under Section 124 of the Customs Act, currently under adjudication. The responsibility to pursue cases of underinvoicing and duty evasion by CHAs lies with the adjudicating authority. Considering the delays, lack of progress in the inquiry, and similar cases where suspensions were revoked, the Tribunal found the suspension order against M.M. Clearing liable to be revoked and allowed the appeal accordingly.