9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
Appeal against suspension of license under Regulation 21(2) of CHALR, 1984. Analysis: The appellant, a Customs House Agent, appealed against the suspension of their license by the Commissioner of Customs under Regulation 21(2) of the CHALR, 1984. The grounds for suspension included the filing of 15 shipping bills on behalf of companies where short shipment of switches and undeclared material were detected, alleged over-invoicing to benefit from DEPB, subletting the license, and receiving an advance from another company. The appellant's counsel argued that the shipping bills were not filed by authorized persons, lack of detailed particulars for earlier consignments, retracted statements, and denial of receiving any advance. The counsel contended that immediate suspension was unwarranted, citing precedents where suspension orders were canceled due to lack of immediate necessity. The respondent argued that immediate suspension was necessary as 15 bills were filed on behalf of a company, similar goods were detected in 47 previous consignments, and the appellant's proprietor admitted receiving the goods. The respondent emphasized the significance of the proprietor's admission and criticized the retraction as an afterthought. The respondent highlighted that Regulation 21(2) allows for suspension where immediate action is necessary in cases of pending or contemplated inquiries against a Custom House Agent. The Tribunal noted that Regulation 21(2) permits suspension if immediate action is necessary in cases of continuing offenses. In this instance, the suspension order mentioned 47 detected shipments of similar goods and 15 shipping bills filed by the appellant, indicating a pattern of misdeclaration. The admission by the appellant's proprietor regarding receiving goods, despite later retracting the statement, was considered crucial evidence. The Tribunal concluded that the suspension was justified given the admission, continuous misdeclaration, and the involvement of the Customs House Agent. Therefore, the Tribunal upheld the suspension order, rejecting the appeal based on the sustained involvement of the appellant in misdeclaration and receiving goods. In conclusion, the judgment analyzed the grounds for suspension of a Customs House Agent's license, considering the pattern of misdeclaration, previous detections of similar goods, and the proprietor's admission of receiving goods. The decision emphasized the importance of Regulation 21(2) in cases requiring immediate action due to continuing offenses, ultimately upholding the suspension order based on the sustained involvement of the appellant in misdeclaration activities.
|
