TMI Blog2009 (9) TMI 555X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Chatterjee, Advocates, for the Petitioner. S/Shri Rajarshi Bharadwaz with S.K. Saha, Advocates, for the Respondent. [Order] - In this writ application the petitioner has, inter alia, challenged an order being Establishment Order No. 240 of 2009 dated August 14, 2009 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Airport Administration) Customs House, Kolkata under Regulation 20(2) of the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 2004 suspending the operation of the Customs House Agents Licence No. R-15 (PAN No. AABCR4323D) held by M/s. Rubee Air Freight Ltd. with immediate effect. 2. The power of the Commissioner of Customs to suspend a Customs House Agent's Licence has been questioned. This Court, however, is of the prima facie vie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... consignments were liable to confiscation. Even assuming that the consignments were liable to be confiscated, the question that arises is, whether the clearing agent can be faulted. A clearing agent cannot be proceeded against, nor its licence suspended in the absence of any culpability or fault on the part of the clearing agent. 7. In the impugned order, there is an allegation against the clearing agent of contravention of the applicable rules. The impugned order has apparently been issued having regard to alleged statements of the Managing Director of the petitioner No. 1, in course of investigation, to the effect that the petitioner No. 1 allowed one Papu who did not have the requisite licence, to file bills of lading and/or otherwise p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t requisite shipping documents and gave instructions on the basis of which the petitioner No. 1 proceeded, is not really material, since no adverse influence can be drawn against the petitioners therefrom. 14. On the face of the impugned order, the allegation of transaction of business through an unauthorised person seems improbable for the reasons mentioned above. The observations are, however, only prima facie observations. 15. The fact remains that the nature of the allegations in the impugned order prima facie do not warrant immediate suspension of a clearing agent with out opportunity of hearing. 16. There will, therefore, be an interim order till 14th September, 2009 restraining the respondent authorities from giving effect and/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
