Tax Management India. Com
                        Law and Practice: A Digital eBook ...

Category of Documents

TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Case Laws Acts Notifications Circulars Classification Forms Manuals SMS News Articles
Highlights
D. Forum
What's New

Share:      

        Home        
 

TMI Blog

Home List
← Previous Next →

2017 (7) TMI 1105

revocation order, ie., on 13.05.2010, lead to filing of an appeal before the CESTAT, Chennai and that the same has been disposed of on 13.06.2016, after 6 years - the order of revocation has resulted in loss of business for more than 10 years. - It is abundantly clear that the said authority had traveled beyond the contents of the show cause notice and considered materials behind the back of the respondent, in determining the guilt of the petitioner, to pass an order of revocation, which is a violation of principles of natural justice. - Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - C.M.A.No.1783 of 2017 - 26-7-2017 - Mr.Justice S.Manikumar and Mrs. Justice V.Bhavani Subbaroyan For Appellant: Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar For Respondent : M .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

se due diligence to ascertain the correctness of the information required to handle the work as a CHA. 4. On the allegation that there was violation of CHALR, 2004, the respondent's license was suspended on 15.02.2006, initially for a period of six months. Pursuant to an enquiry, conducted by the Assistant Commissioner, he submitted a report, dated 06.10.2006, holding that the allegation against the respondent as proved. Thereafter, a personal hearing was given on 07.02.2008, by the Commissioner. Thereafter, the Commissioner of Customs, Cental Excise and Service Tax, Coimbatore, vide Order-in-Original, dated 13.05.2010, has revoked the license of the respondent and also forfeited the security deposit of ₹ 1,10,000/-, furnished to .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

n issued, alleging violation of Regulation 13(a), 13(d) and 13(e), the Commissioner of Customs, Original Authority, had quoted and relied on certain details, which were not referred to, in the show-cause notice. The Commissioner has also relied on certain details, viz., adjudication proceedings, under Customs Act, 1962. 8. Upon Order-in-Original, dated 13.05.2010, of the Commissioner of Customs, the CESTAT, Chennai, has also noticed that in paragraph 13.03 of the Order-in-Original, the Original Authority has relied on investigations and the subsequent adjudication proceedings concluded during May to August 2009-10, to hold that the respondent has failed to get authorization of the exporters and did not observe due diligence in verifying the .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

. 'Proportionality' is a principle where the court is concerned with the process, method or manner in which the decision-maker has ordered his priorities, reached a conclusion or arrived at a decision. The very essence of decision-making consists in the attribution of relative importance to the factors and considerations in the case. The doctrine of proportionality places in focus the true nature of the exercise - the elaboration of a rule of permissible priorities. 'Proportionality' involves 'balancing test' and 'necessity test'. While the former (balancing test) permits scrutiny of excessive onerous penalties or infringement of rights or interests, and a manifest imbalance of relevant considerations, the la .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

ion would mean that the license is totally inoperative in future, it loses its currency irretrievably. Suspension/revocation, as the case may be, has to be directed looking to the gravity of the situation in the background of the facts. For minor infraction, or infractions which are not of a serious nature, an order of suspension may suffice. On the contrary, when revocation is directed it has to be only in cases where the infraction is of a serious nature warranting exemplary action on the part of the authorities for, otherwise, two types of actions would not have been provided for. Primarily it is for the Commissioner to decide as to which of the actions would be appropriate but, while choosing any one of the two modes, the Commissioner h .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

ail an amount of ₹ 7.91 Crores, as draw back and further failed to produce the required BRC, against the said exports and also violated Regulation 13(a), 13(d) and 13(e) of CHALR, 2004, this Court is not inclined to countenance the same, for the reason that the CESTAT, Madras, vide Final Order, dated 13.06.2016, has found that the Original Authority had relied on investigation and subsequent adjudication proceedings, concluded during May to August 2009-10, to hold that the respondent has failed to get authorization of the exporters and did not observe due diligence in verifying the correctness of the information given by their clients. 12. Admittedly, the Original Authority had taken note of the materials behind the back of the respon .....

X X X X X X X

Full Text of the Document

X X X X X X X

 

 

← Previous Next →

 

 

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || Database || Members || Refer Us ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.
|| Blog || Site Map - Recent || Site Map ||