9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (9) TMI 471X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rmation from DRI, as per- the provisions of Regulation 20(2) of CHALR, 2004, the Respondent being satisfied that it was an appropriate case where immediate action for suspension of CHA Licence was essential in order to prevent any further misuse of CHA Licence and also to safeguard the Revenue interest, suspended the CHA Licence of the Appellant firm with immediate effect on 14-9-2005, pending enquiry under Regulation 22 of CHALR, 2004. Consequent to this suspension order dated 14-9-2005 the Appellant was also directed to surrender the original CHA Licence No. 11/171 along with all the Customs passes issued to the Appellant and its employees. The Appellant complied with the said directions. 3. The Appellant by an earlier Appeal, had challenged the suspension order, inter alia, on the ground of denial of natural justice, and this Tribunal vide order dated 15-12-2006 was pleased to dispose off the earlier Appeal by setting aside the suspension order, with the direction to the Respondent to grant the Appellant-CHA post-suspension hearing within a period of two months and to pass fresh orders. 4. The above Appeal has been preferred against the impugned Order dated 3-4-2007 passed b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppellant placed on record before the respondent, an application for compounding of offences, filed by Shri Ramesh Reddy. This compounding application, which is a statutory application duly verified by Shri Ramesh Reddy with his photographs affixed also bears signature of his advocate having identified and explained him averments made by him and recorded in the said application. Averments contained in the said compounding application show that Shri Ramesh Reddy committed several illegal acts, which were done by him not in the regular course of hi: employment with Poojary Brothers, nor under the directions of partners of the appellant firm but he acted, without knowledge of his employers, in his personal capacity and for his personal gains. While relying on allegations leveled in relation to M/s. Yogi International and M/s. Rama Creation, the respondent failed to acknowledge that Shri Ramesh Reddy in his compounding application, has confessed that the shipping bills, though bear the name of M/s. Kunverji Dharshi Sons as the CHA handling the said shipping bills, no such documents were handled by the appellant firm and that he misused the name of the appellant-CHA firm, without bring ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of suspension i.e. since 14-9-2005. 10. That the impugned order dated 3-4-2007, confirming the earlier suspension order dated 14-9-2005, came to be passed after considering the statements of Shri Vijay Poojary, Shri Mohan Poojary, Shri Jitendra A. Jain (who introduced his brother-in-law Shri Yogesh Bafna, proprietor of M/s. Yogi International, to Shri Mohan Poojary), Shri Nitin Tulpule (proprietor of M/s. Rama International). Only the statement of Mohan Poojary was exculpatory in nature, and all others have given inculpatory statements pointing out that gross fraudulent activities were carried out by the Poojary brothers, the partners of the Appellant firm. 11 Whereas the original suspension order was restricted to the allegations leveled in respect of M/s. Aristo Exports only, the impugned order dated 3- 4-2007 also takes into consideration similar fraud of taking DEPB benefits on strength of bogus shipping bills without physical exports of any goods in M/s Yogi International and M/s. Rama Creations, wherein the involvement of the Appellant CHA firm is alleged. No prior notice, however, was given to the Appellant informing that the Respondent will also take into account any o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion filed by Shri Ramesh Reddy, before rejecting the same for continuing the suspension. The ld. Commissioner has not pointed out any inconsistencies in the compounding application, or the circumstances which led to believe that averments made there under were not trustworthy or false. No such exercise has been done by the Commissioner. In fact, the said compounding application also talks about M/s. Rama Creations and M/s. Yogi International. However, while leveling allegations in respect of these two firms for confirmation of the suspension order, the ld. Commissioner clearly overlooked the averments appearing in the compounding application regarding these two firms. The compounding application duly verified/affirmed by the deponent Shri Ramesh Reddy could not have been brushed aside as done by the ld. Commissioner without going into the question whether the averments made therein were genuine and correctly reflected the extent of fraud and without ascertaining as to whether averments contained therein were corroborated with any documentary evidence taken over or collected during the investigation. The Hon ble Supreme Court in the matter Parle Beverages Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
