TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (12) TMI 1131
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Licensing Regulations (CHALR), 2004. The order was passed in view of an order passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Export), Air Cargo Complex, Mumbai, dated 4-8-2010, which was received by the respondent-Commissioner on 9-8-2010. The said order dated 4-8-2010 of the Commissioner of Customs (Export) had found certain violations on the part of the CHA in connection with the filing of 10 shipping bills, all of which were filed in December, 2008, some on behalf of one exporter and the rest on behalf of another exporter. The respondent-Commissioner found it necessary to take immediate action against the CHA and, accordingly, passed the impugned order. The present application seeks stay of operation of that order. 2. Both sides have, at ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....order. 5. Adverting to the facts of the case, the learned counsel has submitted that the Commissioner's order under challenge is liable to be set aside on the sole ground that it was passed without following the procedure laid down under Regulation 20 of the CHALR, 2004. In this connection, the learned counsel has referred to the text of Regulation 20 as amended w.e.f. 8-4-2010. It is submitted that the learned Commissioner had received a copy of the order-in-original of the Commissioner of Customs (Export) on 9-8-2010. It is submitted that he never received any report from the investigating agency. The respondent-Commissioner passed the suspension order far beyond the period prescribed under Regulation 20(2) as amended. This action o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of Customs v. National Shipping Agency, 2008 (226) E.L.T. 46 (Bom.). In both the cited cases, the court found that the order of suspension of CHA licence had been issued long after detection of the alleged violation of the CHALR and accordingly, it was held that there was no emergency for invoking Regulation 20(2). In an apparent bid to pre-empt the Revenue, the learned counsel also refers to the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Jasjeet Singh Marwaha v. Union of India, 2009 (239) E.L.T. 407 (Del.) wherein a delay of 4½ years between the detection of CHA's offence and the suspension of the licence was held to be no inordinate delay inasmuch as the suspension order was found to have been passed on 29-1-2007 within 3½....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat the action taken by the Commissioner under Regulation 20(2) is an administrative action. A Larger Bench of this Tribunal had held long ago that the suspension of CHA licence by a Commissioner of Customs (licensing authority), pending investigations against the CHA, was an action with civil consequences for the CHA and hence of a quasi-judicial nature. The larger bench also held that a CHA, whose licence was suspended with immediate effect without hearing, was to be given post-decisional hearing in accordance with the rule of natural justice. It is this view which was accepted by the legislative authority and incorporated in Regulation 20 through the amendment under reference. Therefore, it cannot be gainsaid that the suspension order of....