9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 705X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r almost one year and the Revenue had ample opportunity to conduct necessary investigation against any involvement by the Appellant. We are of the view that continuing suspension of the licence will be unduly harsh based on the evidence that has been so far brought to the notice of the Tribunal. Therefore, we are of the view that the suspension of their license should be revoked and we order accordingly. It is made clear the Revenue is at liberty to issue notice under Regulation 22 for revocation of license of the Appellant, if their involvement in any smuggling activity can be proved by acceptable evidence - Decided in favour of Appellant. - C/20/2011 - Final Order No. C/362/2011(PB) - Dated:- 10-8-2011 - Ms. Archana Wadhwa and Shri Mat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... declared address by using reliable, independent, authentic documents, data or information. 5. During investigation Shri Anand Singh, G-Card holder (G-card No. 03/2005) of the CHA and Mr. Gulshan K. Mediratta, Partner of CHA firm in their respective statements dated 1-6-2010 and 21-6-2010 had admitted the lapses on their part by not following KYC Norms as required by him vide the CBEC Circular No. 9/2010-Customs dated 8-4-2010 as per the requirements under the sub-regulation (o) of regulation 13 of the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 2004. Also no authorisaton from Sh. Navdeep Singh was obtained as required under the sub-regulation (a) of regulation 13 of the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 2004. All the clearan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the person. Further, the person concerned was available at the address and the Appellant s involvement in any smuggling activity has not been proved. They plead that it is very harsh to keep their license under suspension. They submitted that they have been licensed as a Custom House Agent since 1987 in New Delhi and they were permitted to work in Ludhiana under Regulation 9(2) of CHALR. The impugned smuggling activity has taken place in Ludhiana. They say that they have been out of business for almost one year due to suspension and undue hardship is caused to the proprietor and also their employees and they pray for revocation of the suspension. 4. Ld. DR, on the other hand, submits that the impugned imports were made in the name of p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pended for almost one year and the Revenue had ample opportunity to conduct necessary investigation against any involvement by the Appellant. We are of the view that continuing suspension of the licence will be unduly harsh based on the evidence that has been so far brought to the notice of the Tribunal. Therefore, we are of the view that the suspension of their license should be revoked and we order accordingly. It is made clear the Revenue is at liberty to issue notice under Regulation 22 for revocation of license of the Appellant, if their involvement in any smuggling activity can be proved by acceptable evidence. 6. The Appeal of the Appellant is allowed by setting aside the impugned suspension order. (Pronounced in open Court on 10 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
