2017 (6) TMI 1215

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of Customs was directed to renew the licence of the respondent in terms Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 2004 (2004 Regulation). 2. This appeal was admitted on 21st February, 2008 on the following substantial question of law :- "Whether the CESTAT was right in directing the Commissioner to renew the CHA Licence of Respondent No. 1, in violation to Regulation 11(2)(a) of the CHALR, 2004 and norms framed by the Commissioner in this regard, over looking the fact that the respondent No. 1 did not fulfill the present norms of volume/value of business for 4 years at a stretch due to sickness, especially when he had another authorized person by name Shri Rajesh S. Satnak to undertake the job?" 3. Briefly, the facts l....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....as immobile and could walk with great difficulty, only with the aid of crutches. It was only on 5th March, 2004, he was found to be medically fit to resume normal duties. Consequent to that, for the year 2003-2004, he has been able to transact business amounting to Rs. 2.40 crores, which satisfied the requirements of the public notice for that year. (D)    In view of the aforesaid facts, the impugned order of the Tribunal placed reliance upon the decision of Delhi High Court in Premier Clearing Agency v. Commissioner of Customs (General), New Delhi 2001(133) E.L.T. 533 (Del.) and set aside the order of the Commissioner of Customs. It further directed the Commissioner of Customs to renew the respondent's licence. 4.&emsp....