TMI Blog2008 (6) TMI 612X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 07 - 160/2008-Cus - Dated:- 4-6-2008 - S.S. Kang, Vice President And Rakesh Kumar, Technical Member For the Appellant: Bipin Garg and Kimi Brar For the Respondent: R.K. Verma ORDER S. Kang, Vice President Heard both sides. 2. The appellant filed this appeal against the order passed by the Commissioner of Customs whereby CHA licence of the appellant was suspended as per the provisions of Regulation 20(2) of Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 2004. 3. The present impugned order is passed in pursuance to the order passed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal held as under:- Taking all the facts and circumstances of the case and the gravity of the situation, we are of the opinion that the ld. Com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mis-conduct and order of suspension after the time lag is not sustainable. 5. On merits, the contention of the appellant is that the suspension order was passed in view of the adjudication order dated 20.10.2006 whereby the charge of forgery stood proved and penalty of ₹ 5 lakhs was imposed under Section 112 (b) of Customs Act. On appeal filed by the appellant, the Commissioner (Appeals) vide order dated 31.12.07 dropped the charge of forgery. Therefore, as the charge of forgery which is base of the suspension is now set aside by the Commissioner (Appeals), therefore, the order is not sustainable. 6. The Revenue submitted that in this case the goods were imported by declaring the same as automatic data processing machine wherea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s conducted and a result of the investigation adjudication order was passed on 20.10.2006 whereby penalty of ₹ 5 lakhs was imposed on the appellant under Section 112 of the Customs Act and thereafter the impugned order was passed. In these circumstances, we find that the facts of the decision relied upon by the appellant are not parallel to the facts of the present case. In those cases, the suspension order was passed after a long time, so in these circumstances the Hon'ble High Court held that there was no emergency which required licence to be suspended. 8, In the present case, there was specific finding regarding forgery and mis-declaration of goods by the adjudicating authority against the appellant and the impugned order w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
