Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2014 (8) TMI 773

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s sufficient penalty as appellant is jobless and does not have any other source of income. It is observed from the findings of the adjudicating authority in paras 19.4 and 19.5 of the OIO dated 17.09.2013 that Shri Piyush Gohel and Shri Ramesh Makupalli carried out the clearance work of M/s. Oswal without the knowledge of the appellant. However, adjudicating authority holds that appellant has to be held responsible for all the acts and omissions of his employees as per Regulation 19(8) of the CHAL Regulations, 2004. The order of the adjudicating authority for suspension/ revocation of appellant s CHA licence is therefore justified. The forfeiture of security deposit shall remain. The appellant has to furnish fresh security deposit as per la .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... business being the CHA license holder and one Shri Baburao Pukkalla had also been authorized to sign the documents on behalf of their firm for providing CHA services at Kandla and Mundra Port; that the signature made on check list dated 22.5.2012 in respect of Bill of Entry No. 7083318 dated 12.6.2012, filed for clearance Poppy seeds in guise of Carom Seeds, is neither of his mother Smt. Kalpana Shah nor that of Shri Baburao Pullakka; that he did not know who signed on the said check list and only Shri Piyush Gohel would be able to state the same; that they were conducting their business at Gandhidham through Shri Piyush L. Gohel of M/s. Shivani Shipping having office at 195, Sector -1/A Emerald House, First Floor, Gandhidham; that as per .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ension of CHA Licence was confirmed, which was subsequently followed by revocation of CHA licence under OIO dated 17.09.2013 against which the present appeal has been filed by the appellant. 5. Shri P.M. Dave, (Advocate) appearing on behalf of the appellant argued that Smt. Kalpanaben P. Shah, Partner of the CHA, is a 68 year old lady and was not keeping a good health during the relevant period. That her son, who is the other partner in the CHA firm was also busy taking care of her ailing mother. That during the period of her illness, her son was quite disturbed and could not supervise the work of his employees in the CHA firm working at Kandla and Mundra. That appellant accepts the lapse of supervisory negligence and has already suffere .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the past two years. It was argued by the advocate on behalf of the appellant that the employees of the appellant did wrong acts without appellants knowledge. It was his case that a penalty of suspension/ revocation of appellant CHA licence for two years may be considered as sufficient penalty as appellant is jobless and does not have any other source of income. It is observed from the findings of the adjudicating authority in paras 19.4 and 19.5 of the OIO dated 17.09.2013 that Shri Piyush Gohel and Shri Ramesh Makupalli carried out the clearance work of M/s. Oswal without the knowledge of the appellant. However, adjudicating authority holds that appellant has to be held responsible for all the acts and omissions of his employees as per Re .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... we are of the view that the revocation of the licence should undone at this juncture. Accordingly, we hold that the revocation of the appellant s CHA licence passed by the Commissioner of Customs, shall not be in force beyond 30-6-2004. Consequently, the CHA licence will stand revived with effect from 1-7-2004. We, however, make it clear that the Commissioners order for forfeiture of security shall stand. It is up to the Commissioner to require the party to make fresh security deposit incidental to revival of the licence. In our view, the appellant has already suffered enough for having associated himself with an attempted illegal export of Red Sanders logs. 8. For the reasons already recorded, we are of the view that we should allo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates