TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (9) TMI 1628
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ithin 3 months that was reinstituted in 2019 after the Commissioner of Customs (General), Mumbai revoked the suspension of CHA licence in 2012, is assailed in this appeal. 2. Facts of the case in brief is that Appellant is a CHA licence holder since 1983 whose authorisation for operation at Chennai Customs port had been suspended and it was prohibited from operating as Customs House Agent in any of the Customs station at Chennai after mis-declaration in shipping bill was reported against its Exporter. Mumbai Customs had issued the CHA licence to the Appellant for which Commissioner of Customs (Imports), Chennai had sent the copy of offence report to Mumbai requesting for initiation of action against Appellant's company on the basis of whic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y could not be initiated against the M/s. Vilas Transport Company, for which, in compliance to terms of the CESTAT order dated 15.12.2011, the suspension order has been revoked subject to the outcome of the inquiry being contemplated against the CHA under Regulation 22 of CHALR, 2004. Then after Chennai Customs imposed penalty of Rs. 5,00,000/- against the present Appellant vide its Order-in-Original dated 17.05.2018, copy of which was forwarded to the Mumbai Customs, Appellant was put to show-cause notice again on 01.01.2019, subjected to inquiry by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, CEAC, NSII, JNCH, Nhava Sheva who absolved the Appellant from further action. Revocation of CHA licence again was refused on the ground that no new incide....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... cannot be subjected to further inquiry and action after a gap of 8 years. Despite the fact that a clear direction was made to the Respondent-Department to restore Appellant's licence in the event of the failure on their part to conclude the inquiry within three months of receipt of the CESTAT order passed on 15.12.2011, initiation of proceeding on the same set of facts is irregular and forbidden by the principle of double jeopardy. 4. In response to such submissions learned Authorised Representative for the Respondent-Department Mr. Ram Kumar submitted that in the absence of compete offence report inquiry against the Appellant under CHA Regulation could not be conducted for which learned Commissioner of Customs (General), Mumbai vide his ....