9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (5) TMI 275X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is stated in the impugned order that M/s. Maharaja Cargo failed to obtain statutory authorization from the actual importers; did not check the antecedents of the actual importer including his address and failed to advise the importers to comply with the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962, and the rules and regulations made thereunder. The order further states that for non-compliance of the above provisions as contained in Regulation 13 (a) (d) and (o) the CHA is liable to be punished by revocation of licence. The Commissioner further observes in his order that he has found prima-facie case against the appellant and that if they are-allowed to continue to operate it would be detrimental to the interest of the Revenue and therefore it was necessary to take immediate action against the CHA to prevent them from misuse of CHA licence. (2) The imports mentioned in the impugned order relate to the bills of entry: Nos.665811 dated 21/10/2010, 665812 dated 21/10/2010, 687673, 687671, 687672 all dated 13/11/2010 and 691593 dated 18/11/2010. All the above bills of entry were filed by M/s. Lubecon Petroproducts Pvt Ltd. The first five bills of entry mentioned above were filed to impor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cumstances, in our opinion, it is a fit case to revoke the suspension of licence and permit the customs authorities to take appropriate action as deemed fit after the completion of investigation. (4) The Central Board of Excise & Customs, vide circular No.9/2010 Cus dt.08.04.2010 [Page 1 of the Additional Paper Book] has fixed certain time limits in cases warranting immediate suspension under Regulation 20(2). The Board has clarified that the investigating authority has to furnish his report to the Commissioner within 30 days of the detection of the offence. This has not been done in the present case. Relying upon the said Board circular, the Hon ble CESTAT, New Delhi in the case of Kunal Travels Vs. CC New Delhi [2011-TIOL-473-CESTAT-DELI (Page 102 of the main appeal memorandum) has quashed the order of the suspension of CHA licence on the ground that the investigating authority had sent the investigating report only after three months and had not followed the time frames prescribed by the Board. It is humbly submitted that the ratio of the decision is squarely applicable on the facts and circumstances of the present case. In the instant case, the licence of the Appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s of the case have been put forth at paragraphs G, H, I, J, K and L of the grounds of the appeal memorandum. The Hon ble Tribunal may be pleased to take the same submissions into considerations. (8) He prays that the Hon ble Tribunal may be pleased to set aside the impugned order of suspension and thus render justice. 2. Shri T.H.Rao, ld. SDR submits as follows :- (1) M/s.Maharaja Cargo, CHA filed Six Bills of Entry covering 59 Containers for the clearance of goods declared as Rubber Processing Oil and Extender oil. Based on Intelligence the officers of DRI examined the imported goods in 59 containers imported by M/s.Lubecon Petro Products covered under six bills of entry. On detailed examination of goods lying in 52 containers, covered under 5 bills of entry, the said goods were found to the Base oil against the declared description of Rubber Processing and Extender Oil. On examination of goods covered under one bill of entry in 5 containers it were found to be kerosene oil admixed with low boiling petroleum hydro carbon solvent and 2 containers were found to be mineral turpentine oil as against the declared description of fuel oil by resorting to concealme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... torney and Managing Partner of the CHA. Clearly this is an afterthought to cover up the admitted lapse on part of the CHA for not taking due authorization from the importer in the instant case. (4) Hence, as per their own admissions, the CHA has not verified the antecedents, correctness of IEC number, identity of his client and functioning of his client at the declared address by using reliable, independent, authentic documents data or information etc., as required under the provisions of Regulations 13 (o) of the CHALR, 2004 and has thereby contravened the same. (5) The very fact of involvement of manager of the CHA in the forgery of import documents proves their involvement in violation of Customs Act, 1962 beyond doubt. (6) In the case of Sri Kamakshi Agencies Vs Commissioner of Customs, Madras reported in 2001 (129) ELT 129 Mad which maintained in Supreme Court 2002 (142) ELT A87 has held that the very purpose of granting a licence to a person to act as Custom House Agent is for transacting any business relating to the entry or departure of conveyance or the import or export of goods at any customs station. For that purpose, under Regulation 9 necessary ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of investigation DRI has issued show cause notice to the importers and various other parties involved in this case including CHA on 16.09.2011. On completion of full investigation and issue of SCN DRI has sent its report dated 28.09.2011 to Commissioner of Customs, Chennai on CHA involvement and for taking action under CHA licensing regulation. DRI report was received by Commissioner on 03.10.2011 and CHA suspension order was issued on 17.10.2011 ie., within 15 days from the date of receipt of DRI report. (11) Commissioner in Para 16.1 & 17 of his findings in OIO has already held that the case laws cited in para 3 of written submissions are not applicable to the facts of the present case. 3. I have considered the submissions from both sides as well as the case records. The appeal is against the suspension of the CHA licence of the appellants under Regulation 20 (2) of the CHALR, 2004. The said Regulation allows the jurisdictional Commissioner to suspend the CHA licence where an immediate action is necessary. The time limit specified in the said Regulation is 15 days from the date of receipt of the investigation report. The appellants have challenged, in this case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nal to pre-judge the issue and influence the enquiry and subsequent proceedings. Once the final order is passed, the appellants will have ample opportunity to approach the Tribunal, if they are aggrieved by the said order. They would also have ample opportunity before the enquiring authority as well as the adjudicating Commissioner to put forth their submissions. 5. Since prima facie I find nothing irregular about the suspension order in terms of the CHALR under which the same has been issued, I see no reason to interfere with the same. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed. However, the Customs authorities are directed to complete the enquiry and subsequent proceedings within a short time since the ld. advocate for the appellants expresses apprehensions that the concerned Commissioner is holding additional charge and that the entire proceedings may get delayed. Suspension of a CHA licence brings to halt the work of the persons employed by the CHA as well as hampers the work of import and export handled by the CHA. Therefore, even if the concerned Commissioner is holding additional charge, he should deal with the case of the appellants on a priority. The Board should also e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
