TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2004 (11) TMI 264
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....spension, he had filed an appeal before the South Zonal Bench of this Tribunal and the Tribunal, after due consideration, set aside the same by Final Order Nos. 1474 & 1475/2003, dated 28-11-2003 [2004 (164) E.L.T. 108 (T)]. It is his submission that once the order of suspension has been set aside on the grounds urged in the suspension order dated 2-2-2001, by the Tribunal on their Final Order stated supra, then they cannot be charged again by another suspension order. It is his submission that the action taken by the Commissioner is not "immediate" and, therefore, the criteria laid down under Regulation 21(2) of Suspension is not satisfied. In this regard, he relies on the judgments rendered in the cases of : (a) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... is his submission that all these orders are subject matter of the appeal before the Benches at Chennai and Mumbai. His role was not of a CHA but that of a Forwarding Agent and had no role to play in the allegations made in the said Show Cause Notices and, therefore, he submits that the order of suspension is to be set aside. It is his further submission that he has not been given the post-suspension hearing and only after Bench called for parawise comments, the appellant had been issued with a Show Cause Notice on 27-9-2004. He submits that inordinate delay in completing all the proceedings would harm their business and seeks for restoration of their business by setting aside the suspension order. 2. The learned JCDR points out that the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e this, the question that arises is as to whether the CHA's licence can be suspended and further proceedings initiated in the matter. The Revenue has already issued Show Cause Notice dated 27-10-2004 citing evidence and the 3 OIOs by which the appellants have been imposed with penalties. In the citations referred to by the learned Counsel, although it is very clear that the suspension would affect the livelihood of the appellant and the same has been set aside by giving direction to the Revenue to proceed in terms of law and conclude the proceedings expeditiously, as held in the Larger Bench's judgment rendered in the case of Freight Wings and Travels Ltd. v. CC, Mumbai - 2001 (129) E.L.T. 226 (Tri. -LB). After our due examination of the ma....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....-2004; (ii) 10/2004-Cus., dated 31-3-2004; and (iii) 12/2004-Cus., dated 31-3-2004 were passed. The order of suspension' is within 8 days after the Orders-in-Original have been passed against the appellants and, therefore, it has to be held that action has been taken within the ambit of Regulation 21(2) and it satisfies the criteria laid down to take immediate action in the present facts and circumstances of the case. There is no violation to Regulation 21(2) of the CHA Regulation. Therefore, the citation relied by the learned Counsel in support of his contention that action has not been taken immediate is distinguishable. The earlier order of the Tribunal setting aside the suspension order was on different facts and circumstances and in th....