9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (5) TMI 52X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... na, SDR, for the Respondent. [Order] - In this appeal M/s. Sandeep Co. (Sandeep), a Customs House Agent, seeks to vacate the order of the Commissioner of Customs suspending the CHA licence issued to it under Regulation 20(2) of the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 2004 (CHALR 04). Vide the impugned order dated 15-10-2007 the Commissioner (Customs) suspended the licence with immediate effect. It was found by the Commissioner that the appellant-firm had failed to fulfill its obligations under Regulation 13(a), 13(d), 13(e) and 13(f) of the CHALR, 2004. From the order it is seen that the Commissioner arrived at the above conclusion on the finding that one M/s. Panacea World Wide Traders had smuggled Red Sanders to Singapore i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not in any way involved in the said offending transaction yet to be taken up for adjudication under the Customs Act. 2. Violations of various sub clauses of Regulation 13 have been found against the CHA without specific/proven basis. The charges are of general nature to the effect that it failed to advise its client with regard to the requirements to be met under the Act and its failure to promptly intimate the Customs authorities the failure of its client to follow the provisions. The order reproduces the obligations under the sub clauses of Regulation 13 and finds that the appellant had violated the same. 3. Suspension under Regulation 20(2) is authorized only where the Commissioner finds that the CHA should be prevented from con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssioner - 2006 (194) E.L.T. 188 '(Tri.-Bang.) (v) East West Freight Carriers (P) Ltd. v. Collector — 1995 (77) E.L.T. 79 (Mad.) (vi) GCL Shipping Agencies Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner - 2004 (172) E.L.T. 98 (Tri.-Ban.) (vii) V.K. Singh v. Commissioner of Customs, Hyderabad - 2004 (164) E.L.T. 108 (Tri.-Ban.)] 4. Ld. SDR submits that the order is appropriate and deserves to be sustained. The violations by the CHA are narrated in the impugned order including the serious offence of attempt to smuggle out red sanders. 5. I have carefully considered the case records and the submissions made by both sides. As per Regulation 20(2), in appropriate cases where enquiry is contemplated, the licence of the CHA can be su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case of V.K. Singh (supra) the Tribunal set aside the order of suspension of licence following the judgment of the Calcutta High Court in N.C Singh Sons v. UOI [1998 (104) E.L.T. 11 (Cal.)] on corresponding provisions of Regulation 21 of the superseded CHALR 84, the Hon'ble High Court had made the following observation: "A perusal of the order dated 9th June, 1998 passed by the respondent No. 2 clearly suggests that the power under Regulation 21(2) was resorted to apparently without spelling out in the impugned order as to whether any immediate action was necessary so as to suspend the licence of the appellants with immediate effect. Undoubtedly a plain reading of the Regulation 21(2) clearly stipulates that the requirement to take ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gh Court also found that the order impugned before it did not show that the Collector had applied his mind whether immediate action was necessary in the case. The Hon'ble Court allowed the Writ Petition filed before it and vacated the suspension of the licence. 7. The impugned order displays similar infirmities as found by the Tribunal and the High Courts in the judgments cited. I find that the suspension of the licence in terms of Regulations 20(2) was not justified and was uncalled for. The suspension was not for any action found against Sandeep. In any case the suspension is not proximate to offending transactions implied in the order with the knowledge of Sandeep. The judicial authorities considered above fully support the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
