TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Revocation of CHA License Suspension for Bombay Shipping Agency Upheld</h1> <h3>BOMBAY SHIPPING AGENCY Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUS. (GENERAL), MUMBAI</h3> BOMBAY SHIPPING AGENCY Versus COMMISSIONER OF CUS. (GENERAL), MUMBAI - 2014 (299) E.L.T. 352 (Tri. - Mumbai) Issues:Violation of Regulations 12, 13(b), 13(d), 13(e), 13(n), and 19(8) of the CHALR, 2004; Principles of natural justice; Failure to supply statements made by the partner of the appellant-firm and exporters; Allegations of sub-letting license; Use of unauthorized person for transactions; Failure to advise client on compliance; Lack of due diligence; Failure to verify antecedents and correctness of IEC number.Analysis:Violation of Regulations 12, 13(b), 13(d), 13(e), 13(n), and 19(8) of the CHALR, 2004:The appellant, M/s. Bombay Shipping Agency, was found to have violated various regulations under the CHALR, 2004, including sub-letting the license, transacting through an unauthorized person, failing to advise the client on compliance, lack of due diligence, and not verifying antecedents correctly. The suspension of the CHA license was continued pending enquiry based on these violations.Principles of Natural Justice:The appellant argued a violation of principles of natural justice as the scope of charges was widened in the impugned order without prior notice during the post-decisional hearing. Additionally, the appellant was not provided with statements made by the partner of the firm and exporters, impacting their ability to defend against the allegations.Allegations of Sub-letting License and Unauthorized Transactions:The appellant refuted the allegation of sub-letting the license by stating that procuring business through an individual does not equate to sub-letting. The involvement of the unauthorized person in transactions within the Customs station was not substantiated, and it was premature to conclude on this matter.Failure to Advise Client and Due Diligence:The appellant's failure to advise the client on compliance and exercise due diligence was contested. The appellant had taken permission from the apprising officer before amending shipping bills, indicating a level of compliance. The allegations of not advising the client and lack of diligence were deemed unsustainable without further investigation.Verification of Antecedents and IEC Number:The appellant's failure to verify antecedents and correctness of the IEC number was addressed. The appellant had obtained and verified the IEC code of the exporter, and the genuineness of the code was not disputed. The inability to verify the functioning of the exporter at the declared address due to geographical constraints was considered in the decision.Conclusion:Considering the lack of conclusive evidence and the appellant's unblemished track record, the suspension of the CHA license was revoked. The Tribunal emphasized the need for a complete enquiry before confirming charges. The Customs was granted the liberty to conduct further investigation and take appropriate action in accordance with the law post-enquiry, as per Regulation 22 of the CHALR, 2004.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
