2015 (11) TMI 502 - AT - Customs

Seizure of goods - Attempt to smuggle goods - Misdeclaration of goods - Attempt to export red sander logs in guise of export of furniture - Suspension of CHA License - Held that - Conclusion is irresistible and compelling that there has occurred gross violation of due process and there was total non-application of mind which culminated in the impugned order. The inquiry report dated 16.09.2014 exonerated the appellant wholly on analyses of the material on record referred to and reliance on statements of the appellant; of the appellant s G. Card Holder Shri S.K. Singh and rejection of the statement of Shri D.S. Rawat the CMC employee to the extent that such statement inculpates the appellant s G. Card Holder as having been associated with the transaction in issue. - respondent in prohibiting the appellant from exercising his constitutionally entrenched right to pursue his occupation/business without authority of law and what is more contrary to rights declared in his favour pursuant to the final order of the Tribunal dated 3.7.2014. Revocation of his licence by the impugned order is another instance of acting without a semblance of an authority of law and in egregious abuse of seminal and elementary principles of due process. A senior officer of the rank of Commissioner of Customs is expected to be familiar at least with elementary standards of fairness and of principles of procedural principles - As a consequence of the perverse and shoddy processing of the case the appellant is made a victim of patently incompetent administration of the law. We therefore consider it to appropriate in the facts and circumstances of the case to declare the impugned order dated 5.12.2014 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (General) New Delhi as void ab initio. - Decided in favour of appellant.

Summary

Issues: Gross injustice, violation of due process, fundamental right to carry on business, license suspension, license revocation, non-application of mind, procedural irregularities, arbitrary conduct, abuse of law, restoration of license, imposition of costs.

Gross Injustice and Violation of Due Process:
The judgment discusses a case where the appellant faced gross injustice, serious violation of due process, and a transgression of the fundamental right to carry on business. The appellant's Customs House Agent (CHA) license was suspended and later revoked based on an incident involving the export of Red Sanders Logs under the guise of furniture export. Despite an inquiry report exonerating the appellant, the license was revoked without following proper procedures, including issuing a show cause notice proposing disagreement with the report's findings. The Tribunal found that there was a gross violation of due process and a lack of application of mind in the decision-making process.

License Suspension and Revocation:
The appellant's CHA license was initially suspended under Regulation 20(2) of the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 2004. The suspension was later confirmed but overturned by the Tribunal in a previous appeal. However, the appellant was still not allowed to function as a CHA. Subsequently, a show cause notice proposing the revocation of the license was issued, and the license was revoked by the Commissioner of Customs (General) under Regulation 18 read with Regulation 20(7) of the Customs Broker Licensing Regulation, 2013. The revocation was based on the alleged violation of the CHALR Regulations, 2004.

Non-Application of Mind and Procedural Irregularities:
The judgment highlights the lack of application of mind and procedural irregularities in the revocation of the appellant's CHA license. The inquiry report exonerated the appellant, but the Commissioner disagreed with the report's findings without following the principles of natural justice. The Commissioner did not provide an opportunity for the appellant to contest the report's conclusions or cross-examine witnesses, depriving the appellant of a fair hearing. The failure to follow due process and issue a show cause notice proposing disagreement with the inquiry report was deemed a fundamental infirmity in the revocation order.

Arbitrary Conduct and Restoration of License:
The judgment strongly disapproved of the arbitrary conduct of the departmental officers, particularly the respondent, in prohibiting the appellant from exercising his right to pursue his business. The Tribunal declared the revocation order void ab initio and directed the respondent to restore the CHA license of the appellant within a week. Additionally, a cost of Rs. 10,000 was imposed on the Revenue to be paid to the appellant. The judgment emphasized the importance of adhering to procedural fairness and upholding the appellant's constitutional right to carry on his business.

Conclusion:
In conclusion, the judgment highlighted the importance of following due process, respecting fundamental rights, and ensuring procedural fairness in administrative actions. The revocation of the appellant's CHA license was deemed void due to procedural irregularities and arbitrary conduct. The Tribunal ordered the restoration of the license and imposed costs on the Revenue for the unjust deprivation of the appellant's rights.