TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2006 (5) TMI 35
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....enged in W.P. No. 5663 of 2006. 3. Subsequently, the respondent the Commissioner of Customs, Chennai, by an order dated 27-2-2006 suspended the operation of the petitioner's Licence No. 153/COC based on the suspension order dated 15-2-2006 passed by the first respondent in W.P. No. 5663 of 2006. Challenging the same, W.P. No. 7129 of 2006 has been filed. 4. Since the facts of the two cases and the issues involved are same, both the writ petitions are being heard together 5. Pursuant to an investigation conducted by the Customs Intelligence Unit, Special Investigation Team of Coimbatore Commissionerate, it is said to have been found that the petitioner-CHA had transacted business for non existing firms since the exporters as per ICE and shipping documents did not exit in the address declared therein on verification by the investigation team and certain other irregularities also are alleged to have been found out. Based on the alleged irregularities the impugned order dated 15-2-2006 came to be passed. In the said impugned order, it is stated as follows: "5. From the foregoing it is clear that the CHA has failed to: (i) Obtain authorization from his clients for process....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the operation of the aforesaid licence No. 153/COC granted to M/s. Cargomar, No. 19, 1st Cross Street, V.G.P. Murthy Square, St. Thomas Mount, Chennai - 600 016, in terms of the said Regulation No. 20(2) of the CHALR, 2004 read with Section 159A of the Customs Act, 1962, with immediate effect and until further orders". The above said proceedings are challenged on several grounds. One such ground being that the impugned orders result in serious civil consequences and therefore they should have been made after complying with the principles of natural justice, whereas the impugned proceedings have been passed without providing the petitioner any opportunity to make representation and explain the allegations made against the petitioner. The second ground is that under Regulation 20 of the Customs House Agent Licensing Regulations, 2004, power is vested with the licencing authority only to revoke a license subject to the procedure prescribed under Regulation 22 and the power under Regulation 20(2) to suspend the license where an enquiry against the agent is pending or contemplated is also subject to the procedure prescribed under Regulation 22. 7. A detailed counter affidavi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e would render Regulation 22 otiose. Courts should lean towards preserving the provision rather than rendering them redundant. (iii) The Central Board of Excise and Customs while deleting suspension under Regulation 20 has not chosen to delete the expression "suspension" under Regulation 22. Consequently the conditions contemplated under a Regulation which is later in the numerical order shall prevail. 10. Since it will be useful to refer to the provisions of Regulations 21and 23 of the CHALR, 1984 and Regulations 20 and 22(1) of the CHALR, 2004, the said provisions are extracted below: "21. Suspension or revocation of licence. - (1) The Commissioner may, subject to the provisions of Regulation 23, suspend or revoke the licence of a Customs House Agent so far as the jurisdiction of the Commissioner is concerned and also order for forfeiture of security on any of the following grounds:- (a) failure of the Customs House Agent to comply with any of the conditions of the bond executed by him under Regulation 11; (b) failure of the Customs House Agent to comply with any of the provisions of these regulations, whether within the jurisdiction of the said Commissioner or any....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....in writing to the Customs House Agent stating the grounds on which it is proposed to suspend or revoke the licence and requiring the said Customs House Agent to submit, within such time as may be specified in the notice, not being less than forty-five days, to the Deputy Commissioner of Customs or Assistant Commissioner of Customs nominated by him, a written statement of defense and also to specify in the said statement whether the Customs House Agent desires to be heard in person by the said Deputy Commissioner of Customs or Assistant Commissioner of Customs." In 1984 regulations, the elaborate procedure for suspending or revoking licence under sub-regulation (1) of Regulation 21 has been laid down und Regulation 23. The principles of natural justice are embodied in that procedure. If a question arises before this Court as to whether the procedure of show cause notice and personal hearing as provided under Regulation 23 is applicable to the proceedings under sub-regulation (2) of Regulation 21, this Court would without any hesitation say "no" to this question. The action (immediate suspension of licence) contemplated under the said sub-regulation (2) is only of an interim natur....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....en different provisions of statutes, this Court must give effect to all of them by adopting the principle of harmonious construction. 13. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Reserve Bank of tr. Peerless General Finance and Investment Company Ltd. and others reported in 1987(1) S.C.C. 424 and others, in Paragraph 33, has observed as follows: "Interpretation must depend on the text and the context. They are the bases of interpretation. One may well say if the text is the texture, context is what gives the colour. Neither can be ignored. Both are important. That interpretation is best which makes the textual interpretation match the contextual. A statute is best interpreted when we know why it was enacted. With this knowledge, the statute must be read, first as a whole and then section by section, clause by clause, phrase by phrase and word by word. If a statute is looked at, in the context of its enactment, with the glasses of the statute- maker, provided by such context, its scheme, the sections, clauses, phrases and words may take colour and appear different than when the statute is looked at without the glasses provided by the context. With these glasses we mus....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gulation 20(2) then the very purpose sought to be achieved under Regulation 22 will not be able to be achieved. Therefore, this Court is of the considered view that the procedure contemplated under Regulation 22 is not applicable for an action to be taken under Regulation 20(2). 16 In the case of Liberty Oil Mills v. Union of India reported in 1984 S.C.C. 465, the following legal principles have been enunciated: "Pre-decisional natural justice is not usually contemplated when the decisions taken are of an interim nature pending investigation or enquiry, or where the danger to be averted or the act to be prevented is imminent or where the action to be taken can brook no delay. But an interim order of stay or suspension which has the effect of preventing a person, however temporarily, say, from pursuing his profession or line of business, may have substantial, serious and even disastrous consequences to him and may expose him to grave risk and hazard. There must be observed some modicum of residual, core natural justice, sufficient to enable the affected person to make an adequate representation. Therefore, while ex parte interim orders may always be made without a pre-decision....