2015 (12) TMI 1046 - AT - Customs

Suspension of CHA License - Appellants were prohibited to operate at Mumbai Customs Commissionerate - Held that - Present case is squarely covered under the Hon ble High Court order in appellants own previous case, where we find that the adjudicating authority after suspension of the license SCN has been issued under Regulation 20 for revocation of license, which was before the Hon ble High Court and the Hon ble High Court set aside the entire proceedings, the question of continuation of suspension does not arise. - impugned order suspending the CHA license is set aside - Decided in favour of Appellant.

Summary

Issues:
1. Application for stay and early hearing of the case.
2. Prohibition of operation at Mumbai Commissionerate.
3. Suspension and revocation of license under Regulation 20 of CBLR, 2013.
4. Challenge against suspension before the Tribunal.
5. Interpretation of High Court order dated 27.10.2015.
6. Adjudication of the case based on High Court order.

Analysis:
1. The appellant filed applications for stay and early hearing, which were disposed of following the High Court of Madras Order dated 27.10.2015. The appeal itself was taken up for hearing after disposing of the applications.

2. The appellants, Custom House Brokers registered with Chennai Customs House, were prohibited from operating at Mumbai Commissionerate. The prohibition order was confirmed, leading to the suspension of their license by the Chennai Customs adjudicating authority.

3. The appeal before the Tribunal was against the suspension of the license under Regulation 20 of CBLR, 2013. The appellant's advocate argued that the High Court set aside the proceedings and investigations, emphasizing that the present appeal was solely against the suspension.

4. The Revenue representative reiterated the findings of the adjudicating authority regarding the suspension and subsequent actions taken.

5. The High Court order dated 27.10.2015 in a batch of writ petitions dismissed the proceedings and investigations against the appellants. The High Court detailed various violations and considerations leading to the suspension of the license, ultimately setting aside the proceedings.

6. The Tribunal, after considering the High Court order, concluded that the suspension of the CHA license should be set aside, aligning with the High Court's decision. The appeal was allowed based on the High Court's judgment, indicating that the continuation of the suspension was unwarranted.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the issues involved, the arguments presented by both parties, and the ultimate decision of the Tribunal based on the interpretation of the High Court order.