2018 (6) TMI 741

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....(AR), for respondent ORDER Per: Ramesh Nair This appeal is directed against order of the Commissioner whereby CHA licence of the appellant was suspended in terms of provision of Regulation 20 of CHALR, 2004 and penalty of Rs. 6,18,000/- was imposed under Section 114(i) of the Customs Act, 1962. The case of the department was that while assessing shipping bill No. 335 dated 24-01-2009, the Appra....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....004, hence made themselves liable for penalty and suspension of the licence. The Adjudicating authority in the impugned order suspended the licence and imposed penalty of Rs. 6,18,700/- under Section 114(i) of Custom Act. This Tribunal vide stay order dated 17-1-2011 stayed the suspension of the licence and also held that there is no provision in law to impose penalty on CHA in the proceedings ini....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... under the CHALR, 2004. Hence the penalty was also unwarranted. 6. In the result, both stay applications filed by the CHA are liable to be allowed. Accordingly, there will be stay of operation of the suspension order and stay of recovery of the penalty amount. Needless to say that there will be waiver of pre-deposit of the penalty amount. 2. Shri. N.D. George, Ld. Counsel for the appellant as....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rs, Nagpur addressed to Asstt. Commissioner(A.R.) CESTAT Mumbai confirming that no proceedings against CHA was initiated under Regulation 22 of CHALR 2004. It was also mentioned in the said letter that licence of CHA was being renewed on yearly basis and in the year 2017 which has been renewed for a period of 10 years. 4. We have carefully considered the submissions made by both sides and perused....