9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2012 (6) TMI 31 - AT - CustomsAppeal filed against Establishment Order dated 18.03.10 whereby Commissioner of Customs has suspended licence of the Appellant under Regulation 20(2) of the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 2004 (CHLAR) - Held that - It is observed that Commissioner has revoked the licence of the Appellant vide his Order dated 13.04.2012. In these circumstances, the Appeal filed by the Appellant against the Establishment Order dated 18.03.10 has become infructuous and is accordingly dismissed.
Issues: Appeal against suspension and revocation of Customs House Agent license under CHLAR 2004.
Analysis: The Appellant filed an appeal against Establishment Order No.80/2000 dated 18.03.10, where the Commissioner of Customs suspended the license of the Appellant under Regulation 20(2) of the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 2004 (CHLAR). The Commissioner also initiated proceedings for revoking the license under Regulation 20(1) as prescribed under Regulation 22 of the CHLAR 2004 separately. The learned AR informed that the Commissioner had already revoked the license of the Appellant through Order No.KOL/CUS/AIRPORT/ADMN/09/2012 dated 13.04.2012. The revocation order stated that the CHA License No.S-66 (AAKFS3996F) held by M/s. S.Pandey & Company was revoked under Regulation 20(1) of the CHALR, 1994, and the full Security Deposit furnished by the CHA was ordered to be forfeited under the same regulation. The Tribunal noted that due to the revocation of the license by the Commissioner, the appeal against the Establishment Order No.80/2000 dated 18.03.10 had become infructuous and, therefore, dismissed the appeal. The decision was dictated and pronounced in the open court. The judgment highlights the regulatory framework under CHLAR 2004 governing the suspension and revocation of Customs House Agent licenses and the consequences of such actions taken by the Commissioner of Customs.
|
