9911796707
TMI Blog1995 (4) TMI 288X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e as under : REGISTERED POST OFFICE OF THE COLLECTOR OF CUSTOMS : CUSTOMS HOUSE : NEW DELHI. O. No. VIII (H) 13/144/89 Dated : 7-1-1994 ORDER Mr. Rajinder Kumar Goyal, SM-18, Ashok Deep Building, 4/24, East Patel Nagar, New Delhi, is holder of Custom House Agent Licence No. R-14/91 valid upto 12-2-1994 issued by Collector of Customs, New Delhi, for customs clearance work at Delhi Custom/stations under the charge. An enquiry is contemplated against the said Custom House Agent under Custom House Agent Licensing Regulations, 1984 in relation to the under-invoicing of consignments of Bill of Entry No. 240586, dated 10-8-1992, 241621, dated 14-8-1992, 242790, dated 22-8-1992, 244986, dated 2-9-1992 and 245492, dated 4- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... says it is the question of his livelihood and the action of the respondent is violative of Article 21 of the Constitution. 3. We issued notice to show cause to the respondent. In answer thereto an affidavit has been filed by Mr. Vijay Kumar Takkar, Assistant Collector of Customs. It is stated that the licence of the petitioner was valid upto 12 February 1994 and that the licence could be further renewed only on an application made as per the provisions of the Regulation 12 of the Regulations. Then it is stated as under : 2. A case of gross undervaluation of imported goods and forgery was noticed by the Special Intelligence Investigation Branch (henceforth to be called SIIB) of Delhi Customs Collectorate against M/s. Trishul Industr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tioner and he would be entitled to represent his case before the authority concerned and on that account it is stated that the present petition is premature. 5. The affidavit is silent as to the progress made in the investigation and the stage thereof. We required the relevant files of the department to be produced and their examination shows that there has not been any serious attempt to investigate the matter. It was submitted that the registered letters addressed to Moti Lal Chandra on behalf of M/s. Trishul Industries, Noida, were received back unserved. That would appear to be the end of the investigation. However, in the present proceedings we do not think we are concerned with the extent of the investigations. The fact remains tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shall be filed. 7. Regulation 21 of the Regulations provides for suspension or revocation of licence and Regulation 23 prescribes procedure for suspending or revoking licence under Regulation 21. We may reproduce Regulations 21 and 23 as under :- 21. Suspension or revocation of licence. - (1) The Collector may, subject to the provisions of Regulation 23, suspend or revoke the licence of a Custom House Agent so far as the jurisdiction of the Collector is concerned and also order for forfeiture of security on any of the following grounds :- (a) failure of the Custom House Agent to comply with any of the conditions of the bond executed by him under Regulation 11; (b) failure of the Custom House Agent to comply with any of the pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... course of inquiry, consider such documentary evidence and take such oral evidence as may be relevant or material to the inquiry in regard to the grounds forming the basis of the proceedings and he may also put any question to any person tendering evidence, for or against the Custom House Agent, for the purpose of ascertaining the correct position. (4) The Custom House Agent shall be entitled to cross-examine the persons examined in support of the grounds forming the basis of the proceedings and where the Assistant Collector of Customs declines to examine any person on the grounds that his evidence is not relevant or material, he shall record his reasons in writing for so doing. (5) At the conclusion of the aforesaid inquiry, the Assi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... end the licence of the petitioner. Rather it took about 1 years for the Collector to take action purportedly under sub-regulation (2) of Regulation 21. Even today we have not been told as to what necessity had arisen after 1 years of the alleged illegality having been found to suspend the licence of the petitioner. In normal circumstances licence could be suspended only after resort to Regulation 23. This not having been done, the petitioner is rightly aggrieved. There is, thus, inherent lack of jurisdiction in proceeding under Regulation 21(2). Since the order itself is without jurisdiction this petition would be maintainable. It is not clear as to when the investigation would be complete, when show cause notice issued and adjudication c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
