Contact us   Feedback   Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (6) TMI 754 - CESTAT NEW DELHI

2016 (6) TMI 754 - CESTAT NEW DELHI - TMI - Suspension of the CHA licence - Period of limitation - Held that:- Suspension of CHA licence was made in the present case on 31.03.2010. There was a post decisional hearing granted on 4.5.2010. The outcome of such hearing followed by suspension on 7.9.2010 was before Tribunal as aforesaid. Thereafter the matter travelled for proposition to revocation of licence. The show cause notice dated 5.7.2011 was its outcome. That notice required inquiry to be co .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ri K.K. Anand, Advocate For the Respondent : Shri Rajesh Khanna, DR ORDER Per D. N. Panda Ld. Counsel, Shri K.K. Anand submits that suspension of the CHA licence was made on 31.03.2010. This appellant was before the Tribunal in Appeal No. C/666/2010 against that order on the ground of violation of natural justice and no ground of suspension was known to the appellant. Therefore, Hon ble Tribunal by its Order dated 14.09.2011 set aside the suspension. 2. Apart from the above submission, Shri Anan .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

pleadings were made in the preliminary reply dated 19.07.2011 bringing the legal infirmity in the notice and most particularly, appellant had no role in filing bill of entry, that was totally ignored even in the inquiry report. That report has travelled beyond the allegation in the show cause notice and without considering the defence plea of the appellant, report was made on irrelevant considerations. 4. On the aforesaid grounds, the prayer of the appellant is to set aside the impugned order. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

in connivance with the importer resulting huge revenue loss. Therefore appellant was dealt according to law and there is no prejudice caused to him by the order of revocation of his licence since there were justifiable reasons to pass such order. 7. So far as the limitation is concerned, ld. AR says that various administrative reasons led the proceedings to be little delayed and for the liberty granted by the Tribunal while deciding the appeal against the suspension of the licence as stated abo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

in character since CHAs are inflicted with penal consequence of law under such Regulation. Unless the Authorities are required to act within the time limit prescribed, punitive proceedings shall continue endlessly and the victim shall suffer without bread. Any interpretation to hold that Revenue need not follow the time limit shall bring chaos. When there is no compliance to the law on limitation prescribed by aforesaid regulation, that shall be a tyranny. Therefore, any order passed revoking l .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ce dated 5.7.2011 was its outcome. That notice required inquiry to be conducted by subordinate officer and reported to the Commissioner within time limit. But unfortunately, the proceedings was so delayed and revocation of licence was made by the impugned order dated 14.6.2015. Such inordinate delay is good ground to set aside the order of the revocation following the ratio of the law laid down by the Hon ble Madras High Court in the case of M/s.Saro International Freight Systems 2015-TIOL-2916- .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

2014 (309) ELT 433 (Mad.) has held as under: 20. The time limit prescribed in Regulation 22(1) has to be understood in the context of the strict time schedule prescribed in various portions of the Regulations. Regulation 20(2), for instance, entitles the Commissioner, to suspend the licence of an agent, in appropriate cases where immediate action is necessary. Regulation 22 (3) prescribes a time limit of 15 days. Regulation 22(1) prescribes a time limit within which action is to be initiated. I .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version