TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1999 (8) TMI 392
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....msp;The reasons for the suspension of the licence are that, subsequent to the death in 1992 of Krishna Dayal Valecha, the person to whom the licence was originally alloted and who was qualified in terms of Regulation 9, there is no person in the appellant's company who is qualified under Regulation 9. It has also been found by the Commissioner that Vinay Valecha, Krishna Dayal Valecha's son, has been carrying on business and signing customs document without the authority to do so. The Commissioner has also taken note of the fact that the appellant has been sub-letting his licence to another person named TFS Cargo Services Ltd. He notes that the licence was placed under suspension earlier and revoked due to grave misconduct, investigating to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ovisions are in modification of the earlier provisions of Regulation 16 and the proviso permitting continuation of licence pending consideration. He says the intention of the Government to permit the licence to continue, in the event of a change in the constitution, the spirit of these provisions should be made applicable. It is stated that Vikram Valecha, one of the directors has a category two pass and therefore the firm would have continued. 5. We agree that the earlier revocation of the licence does not seem to justify suspension of the licence under Regulation 21, in any event without carrying out an enquiry. The order of the Bombay High Court passed on 24-12-1997 on a writ petition, filed by the appellant before us, indicate t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... pass in Form G prescribed in Regulation 20, and who, in that capacity, has done work relating to clearance of goods for not less than a year, who can be given a licence in terms of Regulation 6, or the company which employs such a person. Vikram Valecha is stated to have possessed a category 2 pass. This kind of pass is not referred to in the Regulation. On enquiry from the representatives of the parties, it appears that this pass is some kind of ad hoc pass given to enable his employees to carry out some work, and is not given in response to the person concerned being found qualified to conduct Customs work in terms of the Regulations. In other words, Vikram Valecha was not a person qualified by virtue of his having passed the prescribed ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at his death left no one in the company qualified to act as a CHA. This, in our opinion, is a grave omission. It is not as if there were minor procedure infraction on the part of the company which would not justify suspension of the licence. It is a serious omission. The reason why the company chose not to inform the department the correct position is clear enough at least at this point in time, if it has done so, and in the absence of a qualified person; it could not have continued. 10. In these circumstances, we are of the view that the department was fully within its rights to suspend the licence. 11. We are not able to see how the amendment made in September, 1997 to Regulation 16 makes any difference. As it stood from S....