9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 1018X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeal. Accordingly, the present appeal is taken up for its disposal. 3. Brief facts of the case are that an offence report dated- 30/10/12 was received by the Commr. of Customs (Airport and Admn.), Kolkata. From the report, it appeared that M/s. Electronic Enterprise, Delhi vide Bill of Entry No. 7022143 dated 05.06.2012 had imported Assorted Goggles (Stock Lot). They were found to indulge in mis-declaration and undervaluation of the goods. The Bill of Entry was filed by using the CHA License of the appellant. Shri Prasenjit Banerjee of M/s. The India First Logistics Co. in his statement dated 30/08/2012 admitted that he has processed the Bill of Entry in the present case using the CHA License of the appellant. Investigation conducted revealed that for letting out the license, the appellant used to get monetary benefit of Rs. 300 to Rs. 500/- per bill of entry and thereby earning Rs. 75,000/- per month for about 150 bills of entry per month by letting his CHA name used by others.Shri Awadesh Kr. Srivastava , partner of the CHA firm admitted this fact in his statement dated 22/08/2012. Above contentions were further supported and incorporated in the statement dated 28/02/2013 of Sh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsion Order is bad in law. He submits that the allegations of transfer of license to unauthorized persons is not sustainable as such persons were holders of G&H card. He submits that copy of the offence report was not given before suspending the license and no cross examination allowed. Appellant has also being sufficiently punished. In these circumstances, it is prayed to set aside the suspension order. 5. As per contra, the Ld. A.R. submitted that although goods were seized on 4th July, 2012 but the investigation continued over a period of time comprising of the recording of the statements of the various persons to whom the appellant had let out his license. Last statement was recorded on 22/09/2012.The offence report was prepared on 30/10/2012 and forwarded by the investigating officers for appropriate actions to the licensing authority i.e. Commr. of Customs (Airport & Admn.). This report was received in his office on 6/11/2012. On the basis of the offence report, it appeared that the appellant has violated the various regulations of CHALR,2004 and therefore, the Ld. Commr. suspended the license on 15/11/2012. It is the contention that in the present case the order of suspensi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment dated 27/8/12, stated that their CHA is M/s. Kapoor & Co.; however, he transacted all the business and made the payments to Shri Prasenjit Banerjee of M/s. First Logistic Co. Shri Prasenjit Banerjee in his statement dated 30/8/12, stated that as per verbal agreement with the appellant CHA firm, he took the clearance job using the license of the appellant on payment of Rs. 300/- to Rs. 500/- per bill of entry. Similar averments were made by other persons whose statements were recorded by the officers. Shri Awadesh Kr. Srivastava, the authorized signatory of the CHA firm in his statement dated 22/8/2012 admitted about letting out his license for monetary consideration. 7.3 In view of above facts, it appeared that the violations of the various regulations necessitated and immediate action for suspension of the license under Regulation 20 (2) of the said Regulation.He, therefore, suspended the license on 15/11/2012 i.e. within 15 days of receipt of the offence report and confirmed the suspension vide order dated 21/12/2012 after giving post decisional hearing. 7.4 The Ld. Advocate has submitted that in this case the license was suspended after a gap of about 100 days from the da ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ken for suspending the license did not qualify for immediate suspension. Moreover, the charges in both the cases were not found serious enough to continue the suspension order. In the present case,it is noticed that a series of statements were recorded during the course of investigation from which investigating authority arrived on the conclusion that the appellant has violated the various regulations of CHALR. Accordingly, the facts of the present case are distinguishable.. 7.6 We find that the expression, Immediate Action was considered by the Honble Calcutta High Court in case of Orient Clearing and Forwarding Agency (supra), wherein the Honble High Court has observed as under: "22.Regulation 21 (2) cannot be confined to the rigidity of the words immediate action alone. It has to be considered in the proper perspective because other relevant words are important for the purpose of coming to an appropriate conclusion in this respect which are as follows: I. Notwithstanding; II. In appropriate cases, III. Where an enquiry against such agent is pending or contemplated, Therefore, the word immediate action cannot have any independent leg to stand unless it is fit in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
