Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Sri Shipping Services vs Commissioner Of Customs & C.Ex., ... on 7 June, 2011
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
SOUTH ZONAL BENCH AT CHENNAI
Appeal No.C/S/236/2010 & C/350/2010
[Arising out of Order C.No.VIII/10/08/2010CUS.POL dt. 2.9.2010 passed by the Commissioner of Customs & Central Excise, Coimbatore]
For approval and signature:
Honble Ms. JYOTI BALASUNDARAM, Vice-President
Honble Dr. CHITTARANJAN SATAPATHY, Technical Member
1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982? :
2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the
CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not? :
3. Whether the Members wish to see the fair copy of
the Order? :
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental
Authorities? :
Sri Shipping Services
Appellant/s
Versus
Commissioner of Customs & C.Ex., Coimbatore
Respondent/s
Appearance :
Shri S.Murugappan, Advocate Shri C.Dhanasekaran, SDR For the Appellant/s For the Respondent/s CORAM:
Honble Ms. Jyoti Balasundaram, Vice-President Honble Dr. Chittaranjan Satapathy, Technical Member Date of hearing : 7.6.2011 Date of decision : 7.6.2011 Final Order No.____________ Per Jyoti Balasundaram The challenge in this appeal is to the order of suspension of operation of the appellants CHA licence in terms of Regulation 20 (2) of the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 2004 for involvement in the attempt of M/s.Tirupur Pandit Hosiery Mills Pvt. Ltd., Tirupur of smuggling of red sander wood logs in an export consignment of combed yarn the challenge is on the ground that suspension was ordered well beyond the period of 15 days from the date of receipt of the report from the investigating authority, as per the requirement of Regulation 20 (2) and on the ground that no post-decisional hearing has been granted within a period of 15 days from the date of suspension, as required in terms of Regulation 20 (3).
2. Heard both sides. We find that the DRI letter dt. 22.7.2010 to take action against the CHA was received in the office of the Commissioner of Customs, Chennai (where the CHA was also operating) on 27.7.2010; the order of prohibition of operation of the CHA was passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Chennai under Regulation 21 of the Regulations on 24.8.2010; the Chennai Customs intimated the Deputy Commissioner of Customs, Coimbatore to take suitable action against the CHA on 25.8.2010 and the suspension order has been issued on 2.9.2010 by the licensing authority, namely, Commissioner of Customs, Coimbatore. Therefore, the order of suspension has been passed within 15 days from the date of communication from Chennai Customs on the basis of DRI letter. We, therefore, see no merit in the first ground of challenge as we are satisfied that there has been no violation of Regulation 20 (2). As regards the second ground of challenge, we find that notice of personal hearing on 15.11.2010 was communicated to the CHA vide letter dt. 8.11.2010 and it is the CHA who has requested that the hearing may be kept in abeyance on the ground that the suspension order has been challenged before the Tribunal in the above appeal. We note that in the case of M/s.Santon Shipping Service in W.P.No.13813 of 2010, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has held that non-issue of notice to the CHA as contemplated under Regulation 20 (3) cannot be held against the Revenue and has directed issue of notice to the CHA even though the 15 days period prescribed in the above Regulation has already expired. On the basis of the above judgment, we had directed the CHA M/s.Elite Shipping Services to appear for hearing before the Commissioner Final Order No.592/2011 dt. 9.5.2011. Following the same route in this case also, we direct the CHA to appear for post-decisional hearing on receipt of notice of hearing. The appeal is disposed of by directing post-decisional hearing to be granted as expeditiously as possible. The stay application is also disposed of accordingly.
(Operative part of the order was
pronounced in open court on 7.6.2011)
(Dr. CHITTARANJAN SATAPATHY) (JYOTI BALASUNDARAM)
TECHNICAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT
gs
1
2