1999 (1) TMI 134 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against cancellation of CHA license by Commissioner of Customs, Chennai.

Analysis:
The judgment revolves around the cancellation of the appellant's CHA license by the Commissioner of Customs, Chennai. The main issue was whether the cancellation of the license was justified instead of renewing it as per the renewal application under Regulation 12. The appellant had been granted temporary CHA license by the Commissioner of Customs, Bangalore, which was later converted into a permanent license. Subsequently, the appellant obtained a CHA license in Chennai as well. The appellant's business shifted from Bangalore to Chennai, leading to the non-renewal of the Bangalore license. When the Chennai license was due for renewal, the appellant applied under Regulation 12, but the renewal was rejected by the Commissioner. The Tribunal considered the arguments presented by both parties.

The Tribunal analyzed Regulation 10 of the Custom House Agents Licensing Regulations, 1984 (CHALR), which governs the grant of regular CHA licenses. The appellant had qualified and obtained licenses under Regulation 10 in both Bangalore and Chennai. The license at Chennai was issued under Regulation 10(2) and was valid until a certain date. The appellant applied for renewal under Regulation 12(1)(b) before the license expiry, but the renewal was denied based on the non-existence of the Bangalore license.

The Tribunal found that Regulation 10 deals with granting regular licenses and does not provide for renewal, suspension, or revocation. The license issued in Chennai was independent of the Bangalore license, and there was no explicit provision for a linkage between them in the regulations. The Tribunal also examined Regulation 12, which allows for renewal of licenses under certain conditions. Since the appellant met the renewal criteria and no misconduct was recorded, the non-renewal solely based on the absence of the Bangalore license was deemed unjustified.

Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the Commissioner's order and directed the renewal of the appellant's license in Chennai under Regulation 12. The renewal was to be effective from the date of the license's expiry. The appeal was allowed, providing consequential relief to the appellant.