Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 1997 (10) TMI AT This
Issues:
Suspension of Custom House Agent License under Regulation 21(2) of Custom House Agent Licensing Regulations, 1984 without immediate action and seriousness of the violation being indicated in the suspension order. Analysis: The judgment deals with a Miscellaneous Application and an appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Customs suspending the Custom House Agent (CHA) License under Regulation 21(2) of the Custom House Agent Licensing Regulations, 1984. The order was based on a report from the Central Intelligence Unit regarding irregular clearance of garments by the appellant. The appellant's counsel referred to previous Tribunal decisions emphasizing the necessity of immediate action and indicating the seriousness of the violation in the suspension order. The Tribunal in past cases set aside suspension orders for lacking these essential elements, allowing the Commissioner to pass a speaking order. The appellant argued that the suspension order in this case was passed in November 1996, but the show cause notice was issued after 10 months in September 1997, causing hardship. The appellant sought revocation of the suspension based on the precedents cited. The Respondent's representative contended that the seriousness of the lapse by the CHA was evident in the impugned order, where the appellant was found involved in mis-declaration of garments. The Commissioner suspended the license under Regulation 21(2) due to this lapse. Upon careful consideration, the Tribunal found that no immediate action was taken in this case as the show cause notice was issued after a significant delay. The Tribunal noted that the suspension order did not demonstrate the immediate nature of the lapse leading to the suspension, as required by Regulation 21(2). Following the precedent decisions and considering the lack of immediate action in this case, the Tribunal set aside the suspension order and directed the Commissioner to restore the license. The Tribunal allowed the appellants to continue their business in accordance with the law and with due diligence, without prejudice to the ongoing formal proceedings initiated by the Commissioner under Regulation 23 of the CHA License Regulations, 1984.
|