2015 (12) TMI 920 - AT - Customs

Suspension of CHA License - misdeclaration of the description of goods - Held that - Initially the suspension order under Regulation 20(2) of CHALR Regulations, 2004 was passed on 16-10-2012 which was confirmed on 19-12-2012 but thereafter no proceedings under Regulation 22 of CHALR, 2004 has been initiated against the appellant. - as no proceeding under Regulation 22 of CHALR, 2004 has been initiated against the appellant, till date, the impugned order is not sustainable, therefore we set aside the impugned order - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues involved:
Suspension of CHA Licence under Regulation 20(2) of CHALR Regulations, 2004 without initiation of proceedings under Regulation 22

Analysis:

The appellant appealed against the suspension of CHA Licence No. R-53/DEL/CUS/06 by an impugned order dated 13-12-2012. The case involved M/s. Planet Overseas importing consignments twice through the appellant, cleared by filing a Bill of Entry on 23-2-2012. However, subsequent imports were not accompanied by a Bill of Entry. Upon investigation, it was discovered that the subsequent consignment declared as toys actually contained firecrackers. The Commissioner of Customs informed the Commissioner (Import in General), New Delhi about the alleged misdeclaration by the appellant, leading to the immediate suspension of the appellant's licence under Regulation 20(2) of the CHALR Regulations, 2004.

The suspension order was confirmed by the adjudicating authority on 19-12-2012, prompting the appellant to appeal. The Tribunal noted that while the initial suspension order was passed on 16-10-2012 and confirmed on 19-12-2012, no proceedings under Regulation 22 of CHALR, 2004 were initiated against the appellant thereafter. As a result, the Tribunal found that the impugned order was not sustainable due to the absence of proceedings under Regulation 22. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal with immediate effect, granting consequential relief. The order was directed to be given dasti, signifying the immediate effect of the decision.

In conclusion, the Tribunal's decision focused on the procedural aspect of the case, emphasizing the necessity of adhering to the regulations governing the suspension and subsequent proceedings related to CHA Licences. The absence of proceedings under Regulation 22 after the initial suspension order led to the Tribunal overturning the impugned order and providing relief to the appellant.