M/S. D. THIMMESWARA RAO, M/S. SETWIN SHIPPING AGENCY, M/S. N. TAYLOR AND M/S. LOTUS INTERNATIONAL SERVICES Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (PORT IMPORT)

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A common issue is involved in these appeals and therefore all are taken up together for disposal. All the appellants are Customs House Agents (in short, CHA) under Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 2004 (In short, CHALR, 2004) framed under Section 146 of the Customs Act, 1962. By the impugned orders, the Commissioner of Customs (Seaport Import), Chennai ordered continuation of the suspension of the Customs House Licence under Regulation 20(3) of the CHALR, 2004, against which, the appellants have filed these appeals.

(2.) THE learned counsel on behalf of the appellants submits that in all the cases it has been alleged that there is a mis -declaration of baggage of different passengers during the period from June to October 2009. It is submitted that in October 2011, statements of the appellants were recorded. On 25.4.2012, suspension orders were issued under Regulation 20(2) of the CHALR, 2004. Then, by the impugned orders, all dated 23.5.2012, suspension was confirmed under Regulation 20(3) of the CHALR, 2004. He submits that the appellant challenged the suspension orders before the Hon'ble Madras High Court by way of filing writ petition. By judgment dated 2.7.2012, the Hon'ble Single Judge disposed of the writ petition with a direction to the authorities to follow the procedures under Regulation 22(2) of the CHALR, 2004 and the impugned orders shall be kept in abeyance till disposal of the matter. Revenue filed appeal before the Hon'ble Division Bench of the High Court. By judgment dated 4.1.2013, the Hon'ble Division Bench directed the appellants to file appeals before this Tribunal under Section 129A(1) of the Customs Act, 1962 within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of the order.

(3.) AFTER hearing both sides and on perusal of the records, it is seen from the impugned orders that the appellants are CHAs handling UB Bills of different passengers through Chennai Aircargo Complex. It has been alleged that there are some falsifications in the documents produced by the CHA for baggage clearance during the period June to October 2009. The statements were recorded only in October 2011. After receipt of the offence report, the Commissioner immediately issued suspension order under Regulation 20(2) of the CHALR, 2004. The Commissioner after complying with the procedure insofar as personal hearing was granted and the appellants filed representation and thereafter the impugned orders were passed directing continuation of the suspension of the CHAs under Regulation 20(3) of the CHALR, 2004.