SCHANKAR CLEARING & FORWARDING Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Issue Notice.

(2.) Briefly the appellant Schankar Clearing & Forwarding a CHA license in terms of the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 2004 was issued an order dated 10.10.2011 by the Commissioner of Customs suspending its license with immediate effect. The impugned order of the CESTAT would disclose that the Commissioner had based his order on a report dated 09.03.2011 about alleged malpractices adopted by the appellant. The suspension order of 10.10.2011 was also accompanied by a notice; the appellant was given post-decisional hearing and finally on 24.01.2012 the suspension order was confirmed. In the meanwhile the appellant was aggrieved by the passing of the suspension order. He alleged violation of the CHALR and approached the CESTAT which on 11.05.2012 dismissed the appeal. The appellant's counsel relies upon Regulation 20, 20(2) and 20(1) of CHALR and submits that a facial reading of these clearly demonstrates that the order of suspension could not have been sustained on any ground whatsoever. It is emphasised that the time limit for emergent action spelt out in Regulation 20(2) is 15 days from the date of receipt of report which had long lapsed and even the time limit of 90 days prescribed in Regulation 20 (2) had passed when the suspension, without any show-cause or hearing, was ordered on 10.10.2011.

(3.) Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the Appellant cannot claim to be aggrieved since no final order has been issued. It is urged that the legality of the suspension order can be alleged in the proceedings that are pending and no prejudice has been caused. Counsel states that the provision in Regulation 20, 20(2) laid down the time lines and they cannot be read as if written in stone. She relies on the order of this Court in Vinod Tomar v. UOI & Others, W.P. (C) No.12448/2009 dated 28.10.2009 where it was held that in similar circumstance the Court may permit the aggrieved party to continue to participate in the inquiry and that no prejudice would ensue.