2017 (11) TMI 1159 - HC - Customs

Revocation of CHA License - Whether the Tribunal is legally correct in setting aside the revocation of CHA Licence of the appellant No.3 in the circumstances when there is gross violation of CHA Licensing Regulations, under which the said licence was granted, on the part of the CHA himself? - Held that - the decision in the case of Commissioner of Customs Versus M/s K.M. Ganatra & Co. 2016 (2) TMI 478 - SUPREME COURT referred, where it was held that To ensure appropriate discharge of such trust, the relevant Regulations are framed. Regulation 14 of the CHA Licensing Regulations lists out obligations of the CHA. Any contravention of such obligations even without intent would be sufficient to invite upon the CHA the punishment listed in the Regulations. The view taken by the Tribunal is required to be reversed in view of the licence which was granted by the competent authority to particular person with a particular purpose to be utilized by the same in sub-delegation to any person is required to be deprecated. Revocation is upheld - appeal allowed - decided in favor of Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to Tribunal's judgment allowing the appeal of the assessee regarding the revocation of CHA Licence.

Analysis:
The High Court admitted the appeal and framed substantial questions of law regarding the legality of setting aside the revocation of the CHA Licence due to violations. The matter was adjourned multiple times at the request of the respondent's counsel. The appellant contended that the CHA firm managed signatures without authorization and allowed misuse of the license by another entity. The appellant relied on a Supreme Court decision emphasizing the jurisdiction of the tribunal to confirm, modify, or annul decisions, highlighting violations leading to financial loss. The appellant also referred to a Gujarat High Court decision affirming charges of misconduct against a CHA, emphasizing the serious view of such misconduct.

The High Court considered the importance of CHAs in customs procedures and upheld the seriousness of misconduct in such cases. The Gujarat High Court decision emphasized the establishment of charges against the CHA, leading to the revocation of the license. The High Court noted that judicial review of administrative action is permissible only if the decision is illegal, unreasonable, or suffering from procedural impropriety. The court emphasized that once violations of statutory regulations and misconduct are established within legal parameters, the consequences, including revocation of the license, must follow. The court found no merits in challenging the revocation based on the established violations and misconduct.

The appellant argued that the view taken by the Tribunal needed reversal due to the specific purpose for which the license was granted by the competent authority. The High Court, considering the observations of the Supreme Court, quashed and set aside the Tribunal's order, ruling in favor of the department against the assessee. As a result, the appeal was allowed, overturning the Tribunal's judgment regarding the revocation of the CHA License.

This detailed analysis of the judgment showcases the legal arguments, references to relevant case law, and the High Court's decision based on the established violations and misconduct leading to the revocation of the CHA License.