9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 519X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r had exonerated the Respondent from all charges. The disciplinary authority disagreed with them. The charges are not as serious as involving oneself in fraudulent activity. Finally, it was found that the CHA licence was suspended. However, that suspension was revoked after two months. Thereafter, the enquiry ended as above. Till the Commissioner / Disciplinary Authority passed an order in March 2014, the CHA licence was under operation. Thereafter, from March, 2014 till the Tribunal passed the impugned order and duly communicated in to the parties, the licence was revoked. In the facts and circumstances of the present case this was adequate punishment, according to the Tribunal. We do not find the discretion to be exercised either arbitrar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Commissioner of Customs (Appellant) v/s M/s. K. M. Ganatra and others (Respondent) in Civil Appeal No. 2940 of 2008 decided on January 14, 2016, Mr. Jetly would submit that in the case of serious misconduct as is involved in the present case, including non-verification of the antecedents of the exporters resulting in revenue loss that the order of the Tribunal should be interfered with. It is perverse and vitiated by an error of law apparent on the face of the record. 4 Upon perusal of the entire file including the annexures to the memo of appeal we are unable to agree. The Tribunal has found that the Respondent Customs House Agent was proceeded against for violation of the Customs Brokers ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cord. It came to the conclusion that though on merits the order of the disciplinary authority can be upheld, still insofar as the quantum of punishment goes instead of permanently removing the CHA from the register his licence would stand revoked up to 31st December, 2015. He can operate as a CHA thereafter. 8 Though, Mr. Jetly would submit that this is a complete arbitrary exercise on the part of the Tribunal and it should not have interfered with that part of the order of the disciplinary authority, what we find is that this case is some what distinct from K. M. Ganatra (supra). There, the Tribunal on the basis of all the material placed before it came to the conclusion that the exporters were not bonafide. It found that the licence wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The penalty imposed in adjudication proceedings was set aside. That was with certain observations. Secondly, this was a case where the Enquiry Officer had exonerated the Respondent from all charges. The disciplinary authority disagreed with them. The charges are not as serious as involving oneself in fraudulent activity. Finally, it was found that the CHA licence was suspended. However, that suspension was revoked after two months. Thereafter, the enquiry ended as above. Till the Commissioner / Disciplinary Authority passed an order in March 2014, the CHA licence was under operation. Thereafter, from March, 2014 till the Tribunal passed the impugned order and duly communicated in to the parties, the licence was revoked. In the facts and cir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
