Tribunal reinstates revoked CHA license, citing appellant's business hiatus as key; challenge against penalties successful.

The tribunal set aside the order revoking the CHA license, making it operational immediately, after considering the appellant's 3.5-year business hiatus as a significant punishment. The appellant's challenge against the revocation of the license, forfeiture of the security deposit, and penalty under CHALR, 2004 was disposed of in their favor.

---

---

Issues:
Appeal against revocation of CHA license, forfeiture of security deposit, and penalty under CHALR, 2004.

Analysis:
The appellant challenged the order revoking their CHA license, forfeiting the security deposit, and imposing a penalty under CHALR, 2004. The case originated from the stuffing of a container at ICD RAJSICO, Jodhpur, where used goods were found instead of declared handicraft goods. The appellant's employee was present during the stuffing. Proceedings under Regulation 22 of CHALR, 2004 were initiated, alleging violations of various regulations. The CHA license was suspended and later revoked, with a penalty imposed. The appellant contended that they were not aware of the mis-declaration and pointed to a Customs Act discharge order absolving them of mens rea. They argued that being out of business for over 3.5 years was a sufficient punishment. The respondent supported the impugned order, emphasizing the appellant's lack of supervision over their employees and the proven violations. After hearing both parties, the tribunal acknowledged the lapses but considered the appellant's 3.5-year business hiatus as significant punishment. Consequently, the order revoking the CHA license was set aside, making the license operational immediately. The appeal was disposed of accordingly.

---