https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118244 Suspension of a CHA licence under Regulation 20(2) could not be sustained where the alleged forgery was attributed to a former employee acting independently, the licence-holder had promptly made good the duty shortfall, and the record did not show knowledge of the forgery by the CHA. The Tribunal treated the nine-month delay in issuing the suspension order as material and found no basis to conclude that continuation of the suspension was necessary to protect the enquiry or the revenue, especially since the relevant documents were already with the department. The suspension was set aside, while the department's right to proceed under the disciplinary framework was preserved. en-us Sun, 08 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 29 Jun 2012 14:38:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118244 Suspension of a CHA licence under Regulation 20(2) could not be sustained where the alleged forgery was attributed to a former employee acting independently, the licence-holder had promptly made good the duty shortfall, and the record did not show knowledge of the forgery by the CHA. The Tribunal treated the nine-month delay in issuing the suspension order as material and found no basis to conclude that continuation of the suspension was necessary to protect the enquiry or the revenue, especially since the relevant documents were already with the department. The suspension was set aside, while the department's right to proceed under the disciplinary framework was preserved. Case-Laws Customs Sun, 08 May 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=118244