Customs, Excise and Gold Tribunal - Mumbai
M/S. Crown Shipping Agency vs Commissioner Of Customs(G), Mumbai on 28 March, 2001
Equivalent citations: 2001(134)ELT453(TRI-MUMBAI)
ORDER
JH Joglekar, (T), Member
1. On hearing Shri S.R. Narayanan, Consultant for the applicants and Shri A.K. Jain, JDR for the Revenue, we find that in view of the availability of a Larger Bench judgement on this issue, the appeal itself could be taken up for disposal. This was done.
2. The Commissioner of Customs(G) vide his order dated 13.11.2000 revoked the CHA licence of M/s. Crown Shipping Agency in terms of Regulation 21(1) of the CHA Licensing Regulations 1984. The Tribunal set aside this order vide final order No.C-II/1-3/WZB/2000 dated 1.1.01. In doing so, the Tribunal observed that the Regulation 21(1) enabled the Commissioner to suspend the licence but not to revoke it. Taking this as a direction, the Commissioner in his order dated 9.2.2001 now impugned before us suspended the CHA licence. Hence, the present appeal.
3. One of the grounds in which the earlier appeal was allowed was that an opportunity to hear the CHA was not granted. The earlier order of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Verma & Sons(111 ELT 565) was cited. The Bench observed that in a subsequent appeal field by M/s. Freightwings and Travels Ltd. the same bench had referred the matter to the Larger Bench among other issues to examine the legality of the cited order. The Larger Bench of the Tribunal did not agree with the finding that for action under Regulation 21(2), the issue of the show cause notice was necessary but observed that the minimal fairness of a post-decisional hearing must be granted. The Larger Bench allowed the appeal directing the Commissioner to grant an opportunity to be heard. Following the judgement of the Larger Bench, we allow this appeal and direct the Commissioner to give a personal hearing and pass a speaking order on the question whether the CHA licence would continue or not. In doing so, he shall keep in mind the caution given by the Larger Bench in that case.
4. The stay application also stands disposed of.
(Dictated in Court)