Customs house agent licence suspension needs urgent factual basis; mere suspicion and unexplained orders cannot sustain drastic action.

Suspension of a customs house agent licence under Regulation 21(2) requires sufficient material showing that continuance of the licence is undesirable and urgent action is necessary; mere suspicion is not enough. A suspension order must disclose the acts of omission or commission relied on and cannot be sustained where it is issued without a show cause notice or personal hearing unless the regulatory basis and factual justification for immediate action are clearly made out. Applying earlier Tribunal rulings to the same provision, the challenged suspension orders were held unsustainable and were set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether the suspension of the customs house agent licence under Regulation 21(2) of the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 1984, without issuing a show cause notice and without granting a personal hearing, was sustainable in law.

Analysis: The impugned suspension orders were tested against earlier Tribunal decisions on the same regulatory provision, which held that Regulation 21(2) permits immediate action only where there is sufficient material showing that continuance of the licence is undesirable and urgent suspension is required. Mere suspicion, without adequate evidence or a proper factual basis, is not enough to justify such a drastic step. The orders under challenge did not disclose the acts of omission or commission said to warrant suspension, and the Tribunal found the earlier rulings fully applicable to the present facts.

Conclusion: The suspension orders could not be sustained and were set aside; the appeals were allowed.

---