1999 (2) TMI 218

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ri Shankar, Member (T)]. -  This application is for modification of the Tribunal's order dated 19-4-1997 dismissing the appeal filed by the applicant now before us. 2. Advocate for the applicant says that after hearing the Counsel in a writ petition against the Tribunal's order, the Hon'ble judges of the High Court Bench kept the matter pending for six weeks and advised the applicants ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ad clearly recorded that Mahendra Shrimankar was only person qualified and that his 21 year old son had entered into the business. The Tribunal has recorded in para 10 of its order that the only circumstance under which the age of Shrimankar was raised before the Tribunal was as a ground for leniency that he was old. The age of the applicant's son is a matter entirely irrelevant to question of len....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....fficers [paragraph (j)], functions of Pokharkar and his producing fraudulent test report (paragraph (m)), and retraction of applicant's statement [paragraph (o)] do not figure even in the memorandum of appeal and were not argued before the Tribunal. 8.  The contention in paragraph (b) is that the Tribunal had gone beyond the finding of the Commissioner in stating that the applicant had given....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....avention with regard to one or two shipping bills, in determining the quantum of penalty to be imposed. Here again therefore there is no error apparent on record. 9. The contention in grounds (d), and (e) that the Tribunal has consistently taken a lenient view in matters relating to suspension or cancellation of the CHA licence is clearly not one that leads us to conclude that there was an e....