9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Validity of the order for re-enquiry under Regulation 23 of the CHA Licensing Regulations, 1984. Analysis: Issue 1: Validity of the order for re-enquiry under Regulation 23 of the CHA Licensing Regulations, 1984 The case involved an appeal against an order for re-enquiry issued by the Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai under Regulation 23 of the CHA Licensing Regulations, 1984. The initial enquiry was conducted by a nominated Asstt. Commissioner, and upon submission of the inquiry report, the Commissioner found it unacceptable and ordered a re-enquiry. The appellants challenged this order, arguing that the Commissioner did not have the authority to order re-enquiry under Regulation 23. The appellants contended that the wording of the regulation did not provide for dismissal of the inquiry report if found unsatisfactory. They highlighted that Regulation 23 mandated the Commissioner to furnish the inquiry report to the CHA, regardless of its findings, and only after considering the report and the CHA's representation could the Commissioner pass orders. The appellants argued that the Commissioner's decision to appoint an inquiry officer for re-enquiry bypassed the mandatory provisions of Regulation 23, specifically sub-regulation (6) and (7). The Tribunal agreed with the appellants, emphasizing that Regulation 21 did not grant the Commissioner the authority to order re-enquiry. The impugned order was deemed invalid and set aside, ruling in favor of the appellants. This detailed analysis outlines the key arguments and the Tribunal's decision regarding the validity of the order for re-enquiry under Regulation 23 of the CHA Licensing Regulations, 1984. The judgment clarifies the procedural requirements and limitations on the Commissioner's authority in ordering re-enquiries under the said regulation, providing a comprehensive understanding of the legal issues involved in the case.
|
