Page 110 - ELT_3rd_1st May 2020_Vol 372_Part

332 EXCISE LAW TIMES [ Vol. 372

certificate, scrip or any instrument bestowing financial or fiscal benefits
granted under this Act :
Provided that no such suspension or cancellation shall be made except after
giving the holder of the licence, certificate, scrip or any instrument bestow-
ing financial or fiscal benefits a reasonable opportunity of being heard.
8. The grievance of the Learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the
petitioner was not offered any opportunity of personal hearing, though the pro-
vision u/s. 9(4) of the Act extracted above mandates that. It is also stated that the
3rd respondent is not the competent officer to pass the impugned order.
9. In view of these facts, without going into the merits of the case, the
impugned order is set aside and the respondents are directed to issue notice to
the petitioner in furtherance to his representation dated 27-6-2019, grant personal
hearing to the petitioner and examine the records if any produced by the peti-
tioner and thereafter pass order on merits with reasons. The respondents are di-
rected to complete the exercise undertaken by them on or before 28-2-2020.
10. With the above terms, the writ petition stands allowed. No order as
to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
_______

2020 (372) E.L.T. 332 (Del.)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Vipin Sanghi and Sanjeev Narula, JJ.
COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (IMPORT)
Versus
TRINETRA IMPEX PVT. LTD.
CUSAA No. 195 of 2019 and C.M. Appl. No. 30592 of 2019, decided on
11-10-2019
1
Penalty on Custom House Agent - Mens rea - Penalties imposed under
Section 112(a) of Customs Act, 1962 in respect of goods which have been held
to be liable to confiscation under Section 111 of Customs Act, 1962 - Though
under Section 112(a) ibid mens rea may not be required to be proved as condi-
tion precedent, however, when it comes to imposition of penalty, it is neces-
sary to show that said essential element/ingredient is present - No element of
mens rea or conscious knowledge which can be attributed to CHA - Investiga-
tion carried out by CBI and other facts show that CHA acted bona fide and
merely facilitated imports on the strength of documents which were handed
over to him by importer - No ground to interfere with findings of Tribunal -
Sections 130 and 114AA of Customs Act, 1962. [paras 10, 11, 12, 13]
Appeal dismissed

CASES CITED
Amritlakshmi Machine Works v. Commissioner — 2016 (335) E.L.T. 225 (Bom.) — Referred .... [Para 11]
Commissioner v. Trinetra Impex Pvt. Ltd. — 2018 (361) E.L.T. 363 (Del.) — Referred ................... [Para 8]

________________________________________________________________________
1 On appeal from Final Order Nos. 55775-55776/2017, dated 10-8-2017 by CESTAT, New Delhi.
EXCISE LAW TIMES  1st May 2020  110