TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1998 (12) TMI 240
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is contemplated with regard to clearances of I.V. Cannula valued at Rs. 1,22,60,000/- for misclassification, misdeclaration as "Disposable and non disposable cannula for aorta, Vene Cause and similar veins and blood vessels" in terms of G.E. No. 121 notification No. 23/98-Cus. with a view to wrongly avail benefit of exemption notification and clear goods at Nil rate of duty on the Bill of Entries No. 218025 dated 21-8-1998, 110737 dated 29-7-1998 and 215634 dated 1-8-1998. Over and above this, the statement of Shri Sunil Nanda and Sh. Rajeev Malik was recorded under section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962, in which they admitted the facts of misclassification; misdeclaration on the said Bill of Entries filed by him on behalf of the importer. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Entry enumerated in the impugned order do not fall within the description contained therein or have been misclassified or misdeclared and in any event, passing of an order under Regulation 21(2) is not justified. He relies upon the decision of the Calcutta High Court in the case of N.C. Singha & Sons v. Union of India reported in 1998 (104) E.L.T. 11 (Cal.), Madras High Court decision in the case of East West Freight Carrier P. Ltd. reported in 1995 (77) E.L.T. 79 (Mad.) and the decisions of the Tribunal reported in 1993 (68) E.L.T. 419 in the case of Eagle Shipping (India) Services, 1994 (50) ECR 319 in the case of Trinity Shipping and Allied Services and 1998 (98) E.L.T. 275 in the case of Vikas Shipping Agency v. Collector of Customs, B....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... by the High Court which held that the power to suspend the Licence is to be exercised where immediate action is necessary, and quashed the order of suspension as a plain reading of the same did not show that the Collector had applied his mind to consider whether immediate action was necessary in the case. The same view has been taken by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of N.C. Singha and Sons v. Union of India reported in 1998 (104) E.L.T. 11 (Cal.) wherein the Court has held that : `Undoubtedly a plain reading of the Regulation 21(2) clearly stipulates that the requirement to take immediate action is a sini qua non to the suspension of a licence under Regulation 21(2) because such suspension is not by way of any punishment, as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e ratio of the above judgments and orders to the present case, we do not find any indication of the necessity for immediate action and the alleged contravention of Regulation 14 is the subject matter for enquiry under Regulation 23 and does not by itself constitute the requirement of immediate action under Regulation 21(2). 4.1 The decision of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Collector of Customs v. Jeena and Company reported in 1990 (45) E.L.T. 72 (Cal.) relied upon by the learned DR is distinguishable - in that case the suspension order stated as under : 2. Under the circumstances two senior personnel of the writ petitioner No. 1 Sri K.K. Bhattacharji and Janardan Thakur were arrested. The Collector of Customs G. Sara....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e of M/s. Jeena & Co. handled the consignment and had the original certificate prepared in his office and had it signed by one Sri Tapas Krishna Chakrabarty, who was a transport contractor and handled cargo for M/s. Jeena & Co. It was subsequently stated that during search of the premises of M/s. Jeena & Co. and rubber stamp of the supplier at Srinagar had been recovered which according to the Collector of Customs, Sri G. Sarangi, appears to have been used for embossing the country of origin certificate prepared for the clearance of the aforesaid consignment. It had further been stated in the said order that both Mr. J. Thakur of M/s. Jeena & Co. and Mr. K.K. Bhattacharji had been arrested in connection with the said seizure and had been re....