9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 570X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d not ask the appellants to produce authorisation from the importer – it is the joint responsibility of the proper officer and the CHA to obtain the authorisation from the importer and if it is not asked by the proper officer from the CHA to produce the authorization. Therefore, it is presumed that the authorisation is not required. Withdrawal of revocation of CHA licence ordered subject to forfeiture of the security amount of Rs.10,000/- X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... East India Trading Co. & C.S. Enterprises. 4. Shri Anil Balani, ld. Counsel for the appellant submits that there is no dispute that import documents were handed over to the appellants for clearance of the impugned goods and during the course of clearance at no point of time it was disputed that the appellant had not been appointed or authorised by the importer firm and no demand of any authority letter was made. It is also not the allegation of the importers that the appellant has acted without any authority. It is an admitted fact that the import documents and declarations were signed by the respective importers. Therefore, the signing of import documents and declarations is an implied authority to the CHA and no formal authority le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... already suffered by the appellant is sufficient and the revocation of licence will permanently deprive the appellant and its employees of their livelihood and such punishment will be harsh and disproportionate. For this contention he relied on the decision in the case of Sainath Clearing Agency - 2011 (269) E.L.T. 106 (Tri.-Mum.) and K.S. Chhaya & Co. - 2011 (265) E.L.T. 65 (Tri.-Ahmd.) which has been upheld by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court reported in 2011 (272) E.L.T. 180 (Guj.). 6. On the other hand Shri Sanjay Kalara, ld. AR submitted that the appellant had never taken any authorisation letter form the importer and this fact has been admitted by the appellant and the importer also incorporated the facts in their statements. As p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tions and misconduct by misusing the licence, taking into consideration all relevant material and following due process of law, all legal consequences of such violation/breach have to follow. Therefore, the appeal be dismissed. 7. Heard both sides. 8. On careful hearing on both sides, we find that in this case the main allegation against the appellants/CHA is that they have not obtained the authorization from East India Trading Co. & C.S. Enterprises. Therefore, the charges proved and their licence has been revoked. It is admitted fact that the import documents/declaration have been duly signed by the importer and the same were presented before the Customs authorities, and have not objected to the same and did not ask the appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. I find that the inquiry officer in his inquiry report has rightly held that the CHA has accepted the documents through intermediaries i.e. Shri Jitin M. Shah and Shri Kaushal A. Shah and hence they have not met the actual importers. The CHA's contention that it is regular business practice to accept business through middlemen, brokers and commission agents may be good for the trade, however, nothing stops the CHA from interacting directly with the importers thereafter, once the documents are received for clearance. Even for such business/work coming through a middleman, there is nothing in CHALR which exempts CHA from obtaining authorisation letters from the concerned importers. For that matter, it has not come on record that CHA has pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
