9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 135X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... connected to the offence to prevent unwanted influence or sabotage. This order is normally passed immediately after the commission of any offence. In other words, Regulation 21 will outlive its purpose once substantive investigations in the offence case is over. The consequences of wrong doing for a CHA licensee is in the suspension and revoking of the license of the CHA under Regulation 22. And also, once proceedings under Regulation 22 is initiated which is normally done after the completion of investigations in a case, the proceedings under Regulation 21 go redundant. The entitlement to do the business of CHA is to be tested in a proceedings under Regulation 22 of CHALR, 2014. And Regulation 21 cannot be used as a tool to prevent the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he alleged undervaluation. In the aforementioned situations, the petitioner resists vicarious liability in the proceedings before various forum including in the Writ Petition. 3.The case was adjudicated upon and a total penalty of ₹ 3 lakhs was imposed on the petitioner on the charge of abetment. On appeal before the first appellate authority, the penalty was reduced to ₹ 2,20,000/- vide OIA No 36/2011 dated 28.04.2011. The petitioner has preferred an appeal before the CESTAT along with application for stay and waiver of Pre-deposit which is pending adjudication before CESTAT. 4.The petitioner submits that the department was insisting on payment of penalty amount while the petitioner had requested them to wait for the outc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the 1st respondent to keep the prohibition proceedings in abeyance until the Show Cause notice dated 12.11.2012 is adjudicated. 7.The respondents submit that the impugned communication dated 01.01.2013 is not at all an order and is only an intimation letter sent to the Writ Petitioner calling them to appear for personal hearing on 10.01.2013. It was averred that the communication was a notice of personal hearing to appear before the 1st respondent who intends to hear the case. It was denied that the opportunity of cross examination was denied to them. It was submitted that in imposing prohibitive action under Regulation 21 of CHALR, 2004 the question of cross examination does not arise. It was submitted that Cross examination will be a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the punitive provisions under the CHALR, 2014 against the petitioner is a classic case of cat and mouse game between the Department and petitioner that is nobody's cause. A cursory reading of regulations 13 and 21 indicates that the prohibition contemplated under Regulation 21 is aimed at separating the CHA from access to offices and sections connected to the offence to prevent unwanted influence or sabotage. This order is normally passed immediately after the commission of any offence. In other words, Regulation 21 will outlive its purpose once substantive investigations in the offence case is over. 11.The consequences of wrong doing for a CHA licensee is in the suspension and revoking of the license of the CHA under Regulation 22. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
