Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Delhi
Syed Ahmed And Co. vs Collector Of Customs on 24 April, 1996
Equivalent citations: 1996(84)ELT494(TRI-DEL)
ORDER K. Sankararaman, Member (T)
1. Shri A.S. Sunder Rajan, learned Counsel for the applicants states that their CHA Licence had been suspended in August, 1995 and till today no show cause notice had been issued to them. When the matter had been heard earlier by the Bench in December, 1995, a direction was given to the department to take steps for issue of notice and completion of inquiry within a period of two months. The Bench took note of the fact that the continuous suspension affected the livelihood and right to carry on the business of the applicants. The learned counsel then referred to the report sent by the Additional Commissioner of Customs (Policy) to the Senior Departmental Representative wherein it had been stated that unless the show cause notice under the Customs Act is issued specifying the allegation of abetment etc. against the CHA, it would be difficult to bring out the charges under CHA Licensing Regulation. Shri Sunder Rajan pointed out that this would make it clear that department has still not finalised the matter. They had filed a writ in the Delhi High Court and by order dated 28-3-1996 the court while dismissing the writ had directed that the applicants may move a self contained detailed application to the Tribunal. Pursuant to this direction they had filed a detailed application. The learned counsel pleads that pending the finalisation of the investigation and issue of show cause notice the department should be directed to revoke the suspension order served on them and permit them to carry on their legitimate business as CHA.
2. Shri Mewa Singh, learned Senior Departmental Representative states that in March, 1996 they have received a letter from the Deputy Commissioner of Customs, Inland Container Depot stating that the matter is under correspondence with other departments concerned and till the inquiry is completed, the mala fide of the importer cannot be established. If no case survives against the importers, the case of the CHA on grounds of abetment will also not stand.
3. From the facts which have come on record, it is clear that even nearly 8 months after the suspension of the CHA licence, the investigations have not been completed. In the circumstances, we are satisfied that this is a fit case to set aside the order of suspension of the CHA licence ordered by the authority. We hold accordingly and direct the Commissioner to restore the CHA licence to the applicants after taking suitable safeguards as deemed necessary to facilitate proper investigation and take care that such investigations are not tempered with. It is made clear that this direction to set aside the suspension order is without prejudice to the right to the department to proceed in the matter in the light of the investigation.
4. Order to be served Dasti.