Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2016 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (4) TMI 1214 - CESTAT MUMBAIRestoration of CHA licence - Appellant has challenged the suspension on the ground that no action lies against them under the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013 as they, in the absence of access to the customs clearance systems, had not undertaken any work - Held that: - the appellant, though a holder of a customs brokers licence, continued to function within the logistics chain as it did before obtaining its own licence. It is normal bona fide practice in the trade for a freight forwarder to engage a ‘customs broker’ to handle the clearance formalities of its customers. There is no bar on the services of a ‘customs broker’ being contracted by freight forwarders or even other customs brokers. It is the contracted customs broker, who, in the present instance, is M/s. Vignesh Freight Forwarders Pvt. Ltd., to ensure compliance with the provisions of the Customs Act, 1962. There is no allegation of non-compliance of contravention of the Customs Act, 1962 against appellant or contracted customs broker. Further, there is no prescription on the manner and terms of employment of individuals by customs brokers. To the extent that a broker has sought for and obtained passes for individuals claimed to be their employees, the brokers are responsible vicariously for any contravention of the provisions of the CA, 1962 or breach of the Regulations by such employees - the appellant has not rendered any service as a ‘customs broker’ in relation to import or export consignment and is, therefore, outside the ambit of the said Regulations - suspension order set aside and licence directed to be restored - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
|