9911796707
TMI Blog2004 (6) TMI 175X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uld be undone at this juncture. Accordingly, we hold that the order of revocation of the appellant's CHA licence, passed by the Commissioner of Customs, shall not be in force beyond 30-6-2004. Consequently, the CHA licence will stand revived with effect from 1-7-2004. We, however, make it clear that the Commissioner's order for forfeiture of security shall stand. It is up to the Commissioner to require the party to make fresh security deposit incidental to revival of the licence. The appeal is disposed of in the above terms. - S/Shri P.G. Chacko, Member (J) and Jeet Ram Kait, Member (T) [Order per : P.G. Chacko, Member (J) (Oral)]. - The appellant was a CHA. In the present appeal, an order of the Commissioner of Customs revoking h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the present appeal. 3. Ld. Counsel has submitted that there is no dispute of the fact that the appellant had allowed his signature to be used on export documents of the aforesaid consignments, by other persons who had no CHA licence of their own. In other words, the appellant's licence was allowed to be misused by others. Undisputedly, this act of the appellant was in breach of the obligation laid down for Custom House Agents under Clauses (b) and (l) of Regulation No. 14. Again, the appellant has no case that any breach of Clauses (b) and (l) of Regulation No. 14 would not entail revocation of the CHA Licence. The limited case of the appellant, as presented before us today, is that the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case should be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly took into account the hardships already suffered by the CHAs on account of suspension/revocation of their licences, and, in a sound exercise of discretion, terminated the suspension/revocation. In the case cited by ld. SDR, the CHA had allowed his licence to be used by some other persons in connection with exports. The Bench noted that such an act of the CHA facilitated commission of fraud on the revenue and hence required to be seriously dealt with under the CHA Licensing Regulations. The Bench was not inclined to take a lenient view. On the other hand, it held that the Tribunal had no power to take such a view. On our part, we observe that exercising discretion, having regard to the peculiar facts and circumstances of a given case, cou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
