SIGN IN SUBSCRIBE

News Update

CLAT 2024 exams to be held on Dec 1NCGG commences Programme for officials of TanzaniaGST - Appellate Authority has not noticed the provisions of Section 12 of the Limitation Act, 1963 which mandates that the day on which the judgment complained of was pronounced, is also to be excluded: HCDefence Secretary commends BRO for playing major role in country's securityGST - If the Proper Officer was of the view that the reply filed was insufficient, he could have sought more clarification - Without providing any such opportunity, impugned order could not have been passed - Matter remanded: HCSC holds influencers, celebrities equally accountable for misleading adsGST - Notice requiring petitioner to furnish additional information/clarification does not mention that petitioner had to appear for personal hearing - Since no opportunity of personal hearing was given, order is unsustainable: HCIndian Naval ships arrive at Singapore; to head towards South China SeaGST - For the purposes of DNB and FNB courses, petitioner clearly falls within the scope of an educational institution imparting education to students enrolled with it as a part of a curriculum - Services exempted: HCIndia's MEDTECH industry holds immense potential: Dr Arunish ChawlaKejriwal’s judicial custody extended till May 20GST - Candidates appearing for the screening tests are not students of the petitioner - Petitioner's claim of exemption on such examination fees is unmerited: HCBrisk voting reported from all 96 LS seats; PM casts vote in AhmedabadGST - NEET examinations are in the nature of an entrance examination - Petitioner would be entitled to the benefit of an exemption by virtue of Serial No.66(aa) of the 2017 Notification, which came into effect on 25.01.2018: HCIndia calls back half of troops stationed at MaldivesIndia-Australia DTAA: Economic Statecraft through TaxRBI alerts against misuse of banking channels for facilitating illegal forex tradingTime Limit to file Appeal in GST Appellate TribunalEC censures Jagan Reddy & Chandrababu Naidu for MCC violationsFrance tells Xi Jinping EU needs protection from China’s cheap importsI-T- Addition cannot be made merely for reason that assessee got property transferred through registered sale without making payment to vendor: ITATI-T- Addition which is not based on the reasons for reopening is un-sustainable sans notice u/s 148 of the ACT: ITATOxygen valve malfunction delays launch of Boeing’s first crewed spacecraftFM administers Oath to Justice Sanjaya Kumar Mishra as first President of GST TribunalGhana agrees to activate UPI links in 6 monthsED seizes about 20 kg gold from locker of a cyber scammer in Haryana
 
CHALR - Commissioner has no power to appoint second enquiry officer - Regulation 22(7) only gives power to consider report submitted by enquiry officers - Order revoking license set aside: CESTAT

By TIOL News Service

CHANDIGARH, DEC 30, 2016: THE DRI, Ludhiana detected a case of attempted export of non-basmati rice which was prohibited under Sl. No. 45A of Schedule 2 of ITC (HS) classification of Export and Import items read with para 2.1 of the Foreign Trade Policy through the appellant. On the basis of that investigation, an enquiry report was submitted, therefore, the CHA Licence was suspended on 07.07.2010, thereafter, post suspension hearing was given to the appellant on 27.07.2010 by the Commissioner of Customs and after considering the submissions of the appellant, the suspension was confirmed vide order dated 13.08.2010. In the meantime, the show cause notice was issued to the appellant on 12.08.2010 under Regulation 22 of the CHALR 2004.

The Deputy Commissioner conducted the enquiry and submitted his report dated 26.06.2012 and no case has been made for suspension of CHA licence. As the Commissioner of Customs did not agree with the report, he appointed another enquiry officer on 04.07.2012. The enquiry officer submitted his report on 10.08.2012, thereafter, the order of revocation of CHA licence was passed by the Commissioner of Customs on 19.11.2012 revoking the CHA licence and forfeiture of security deposit. The appellant is before the CESTAT challenging the said order.

After hearing both sides, the Tribunal held:

+ Admittedly in this case, the time limit has not been followed strictly by the Commissioner of Customs as well as enquiry officers therefore, the impugned order is in gross violation of Provisions Regulation 22 of the CHALRs 2004. Therefore, the impugned order is not sustainable.

+ T he first enquiry report was submitted by the enquiry officers on 26.06.2012 which was not supplied to the appellant and the Commissioner of Customs arbitrarily appointed another enquiry officer on 04.07.2012 who submitted the report as per the wishes of the Commissioner of Customs on 10.08.2012. In fact, there is no provisions in CHALR, 2004 to appoint second enquiry officers but Regulation 22(7) only gives power to the Commissioner of Customs to consider the report submitted by enquiry officers and taken the decision thereon which the Commissioner failed to do so. We do not find any merit in the impugned order, accordingly, the same lacks merit, hence set aside.

(See 2016-TIOL-3361-CESTAT-CHD)


POST YOUR COMMENTS
   

TIOL Tube Latest

TIOL Tube
Shri N K Singh, recipient of TIOL FISCAL HERITAGE AWARD 2023, delivering his acceptance speech at Fiscal Awards event held on April 6, 2024 at Taj Mahal Hotel, New Delhi.

TOP NEWS

AR not Afar by SK Rahman

VISION 360



Shri Ram Nath Kovind, Hon'ble 14th President of India, addressing the gathering at TIOL Special Awards event.

TII LATEST

TIOLCORPLAWS LATEST