Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + HC Customs - 2016 (4) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (4) TMI 230 - HC - CustomsImposition of penalty - Revocation of CHA Licence - relying upon the alleged report of the enquiry submitted after the lapse of more than four years of the initiation of the enquiry - Banned goods exported as misdeclared - Contravention of Regulation 13(a) of CHALR, 2004 - Non-obtainance of proper authorization from the exporter - Held that:- there is no advertence in the Tribunal's argument that a period from June to November, 2008 for conduct of the enquiry and submission of the report in June, 2013, has not been explained. There is absolutely no discussion in the Tribunal's order as to why this delay occurred and whether that could be said to be fatal to the proceedings. The Tribunal also does not consider the fact that during this period the licence of the appellant was renewed when it expired by efflux of time. Thus, the Tribunal should have noted that if the penalty is imposed on 28th March, 2013, from 29th November, 2008 to 28th March, 2013, the petitioner was merrily carrying on the business as a Customs House Agent and was also obtaining renewal of the licence which expired by efflux of time. Thus when the licence was suspended on 29th February, 2008, it was still in force. If the enquiry was continuing and the period of the licence expired allegedly by efflux of time during such enquiry, then, there is no explanation forthcoming as to why the licence came to be renewed. Once the facts are so glaring, the lapse on the part of the appellant was serious and it actively associated itself with smuggling of the red sanders, then, all the more the Tribunal should have considered this aspect a little more carefully. By perusal of enquiry report it is found that besides reproduction of the charge and version of the Presenting Officer and some statements of witnesses, the Enquiry Officer has not come to any independent conclusion as to how the charge stands proved. Therefore, the charge of appellant is accepted at best that he could be held to be guilty of this charge and for the same the penalty that he has suffered of loss of licence as a Customs House Agent from 28th March, 2013, till today should be sufficient. Further, the forfeiture of security deposit in addition can also be ordered. - Decided partly in favour of appellant
|