2009 (12) TMI 258 - AT - Customs

Customs House Agent License Suspension Overturned: Emphasis on Natural Justice and Procedural Fairness

PARIKH CLEARING AGENCY PVT. LTD. Versus COMMR. OF CUS., AHMEDABAD

The Tribunal set aside the impugned order suspending a Customs House Agent (CHA) license due to lack of opportunity for the appellants, absence of ... Natural Justice- plea that no notice needed before suspension of licence, not acceptable as opportunity to be given before passing order leading to civil consequences. Decisions relied on by revenue not holding opportunity to be given before passing order leading to civil consequences. Decision relied on by revenue not holding opportunity not to be given before suspension. No clear finding on role of CHA firm in impugned order. Tribunal Larger Bench holding post decision hearing to be given if action was required immediately. Stay order not implemented and instead application seeking modification filed. Held that- impugned order set aside. Appellate Tribunal’s order- order staying suspension of CHA licence passed on 12.10.2009. revenue seeking modification by filing application on 8.12.2009. Appellant contending that modification application filed only after letter written seeking implementation of stay order. Judicial discipline required Department to follow decision of Tribunal and implement it or file appeal before High Court. Application showing lack of application of mind by officers. Issues:1. Suspension of CHA license by impugned order2. Modification application by Revenue regarding suspension procedure3. Implementation of stay order by appellants4. Necessity of show cause notice before suspension5. Lack of clear findings in Commissioner's order6. Appellant's experience as CHA and willingness to cooperate7. Allegations against CHA firm and justification for suspension8. Compliance with principles of natural justice in suspension orderAnalysis:1. The judgment dealt with the suspension of a Customs House Agent (CHA) license by an impugned order. A stay petition was allowed by the Tribunal, and the matter was listed for final hearing along with miscellaneous applications from both sides.2. The Revenue filed a modification application citing decisions of High Courts regarding the suspension procedure. However, the Tribunal found these decisions irrelevant as they did not mandate giving an opportunity to the CHA firm before suspension. The modification application was rejected.3. The appellants filed an application for the implementation of the stay order. Despite the application becoming irrelevant due to the final hearing, observations were made regarding the department's lack of action and failure to follow judicial discipline.4. The Tribunal considered the necessity of a show cause notice before suspension, emphasizing the importance of giving the concerned party an opportunity to present their case. The Tribunal referred to Supreme Court decisions and found merit in the argument presented by the appellants' advocate.5. The lack of clear findings in the Commissioner's order regarding the role of the CHA firm was highlighted. The absence of specific charges and details raised questions about the basis of the suspension.6. The appellant's advocate emphasized the appellant's long-standing experience as a CHA and willingness to cooperate by not working for any individual until the issue was resolved. This aspect was considered during the analysis.7. Allegations against the CHA firm, including misdeclaration and failure to perform their role, were discussed. The Tribunal considered the justification for suspension based on the evidence presented by the Revenue.8. Compliance with principles of natural justice in the suspension order was a crucial aspect of the judgment. The Tribunal referred to Supreme Court decisions and a previous Tribunal order to emphasize the importance of providing a post-decisional hearing and ensuring due process.In conclusion, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order due to the lack of opportunity given to the appellants, absence of post-decisional hearing, and failure to conduct or contemplate an enquiry as required under the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations. The judgment underscored the significance of upholding principles of natural justice in administrative actions with civil consequences.