Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
M/S.Sai Chhaya Impex Pvt. Ltd vs Cc (General), New Delhi on 1 June, 2016
CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI Date of Hearing/Decision:01.06.2016 Customs Appeal No. 53388 of 2015 [Arising out of Order-in-Original No.115/SM/Policy/2015 dated 8.9.2015 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (General), New Delhi] M/s.Sai Chhaya Impex Pvt. Ltd. Appellant Vs. CC (General), New Delhi Respondent
Appearance: Rep. by Shri Mohan Lal, Advocate for the appellant.
Rep. by Shri K. Poddar, DR for the respondent Coram : Honble Shri D.N. Panda, Member (Judicial) Honble Shri B. Ravichandran, Member (Technical) Final Order No. 51977/2016 Per D.N. Panda:
In this appeal, the inquiring authority by his inquiry report dated 18.06.2015 concluded that the appellant had not contravened the provisions of Regulation 11(a), (d) & (n) of CBLR, 2013. When such conclusion was the outcome of the inquiry, the licence Revoking Authority without serving any show cause notice on the appellant conveying his intention that he differs with the conclusion of enquiring authority passed the impugned order revoking the licence of the appellant which goes to the root of the matter and fails to stand in the eyes of law being prejudicial to the interest of justice. Appellant has been accordingly forced to suffer by the order of revocation.
2. Revenue supports the order of the Authority below.
3. Law requires that before imposing any penalty of any nature, the person on whom the penalty is inflicted has right to be heard on such proposition. But this is the case where the appellant was deprived of opportunity of being heard when revocating officer proposed to revoke the CHA licence of the appellant without any contravention of law reported by the enquiry authority. Therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. Appeal is allowed accordingly.
[Order dictated & pronounced in open court] ( D.N. Panda ) Member (Judicial) ( B. Ravichandran ) Member (Technical) Ckp.
1