9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (3) TMI 206X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unds for the suspension : (i) It is came on record that theft of cargo from container unloaded on the ship Orient Shreyas was engineered by Abhay Singh Uday Singh, employee of the appellant in connivance with the importer of the goods. (ii) It has been reported to him that the employees of the appellant removed an official note sheet, substituted chartered engineer's certificate, in a bill of entry. (iii) Partner, Vinayak D Patkar of the company admitted having signed the bill of entry and having received Rs. 300/- from Abhay Singh for signing it. (iv) It has been reported that Shivkumar Dubey of M/s. Johnson International was stated to be using the Appellant's licence and Patkar has admitted that he was receivi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... epartmental representative emphasised that the suspension has not been resorted to as a consequence of a single infraction of the appellant but consequent on a number of acts referred to in the order. Their gravity indicates its unsuitability to continue working in an area. Its untrustworthiness in handling papers of the department and hence it continues to posses danger to with the working of the department. Some delay in issuing order does not vitiate it. He cites the Tribunal decision in J.A.C. Enterprises v. Collector - 1994 (72) E.L.T. 626 and in Eagle Shipping (India) Services v. Collector - 1993 (68) E.L.T. 419. 6. Regulation 21 empowers in sub-regulation (1) the Commissioner to suspend or revoke the licence of a Custom House A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re is nothing to show that any of the partners of the applicant was involved in, or knew, or had prior knowledge of the theft. Abhay Singh Uday Singh's guilt itself has not been established in a court of law. The matter appears to be in the preliminary stage of investigation. Further, the theft itself took place in March, 1998, six months prior to the suspension. The substitution of the official document referred to in ground two of the order appears to have taken place in May, 1998. It appears that the employees involved were the same Abhay Singh Uday Singh and another. Here again, prior knowledge or participation of the partners, is not established. The reason in ground three that the appellant received some money for signing of the bill ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
