Home Case Index All Cases Customs Customs + AT Customs - 2020 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (1) TMI 1338 - AT - CustomsRevocation of CHA License - forfeiture of security deposit - custom house agent is in appeal on the submission that the charge against them had been framed for not obtaining letter of authority from the exporter which, according to them, does not constitute breach of obligation as ‘custom house agent’ as there is no mandate in the Regulations for obtaining such letter of authority for every instance of shipment - HELD THAT:- The appeal of custom house agent has not advanced any plea of breach of the procedure laid down in Custom House Agents Licensing Regulations, 2003. Nor is there any submission that the principles of natural justice have been denied to them. There is a clear finding of the licensing authority that the ‘custom house agent’, though dealing with the exporter for a long time, had failed to maintain the authority letter which was required to be obtained for each job undertaken. Power of Commissioner of Customs (General) to review orders of Commissioners of Customs - section 129D (1) of CA, 1962 - HELD THAT:- It was held in the case of COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS (GENERAL) , MUMBAI VERSUS MUKADAM FREIGHT SYSTEMS PVT LTD [2017 (5) TMI 798 - CESTAT MUMBAI] that there is no such provision for review in the Customs House Agents Licencing Regulations, 1984. Furthermore, from a reading of section 146 of Customs Act, 1962 that enables notification of regulations for governing the operation of custom house agents and in which the scope and extent of such regulations to encompass, specifically, appeals are enumerated while limiting such appeals only to the appeals, if any, against an order of suspension or revocation of a license, and the period within which such appeals shall be filed - Had the general provision of appellate jurisdiction in Customs Act, 1962 sufficed, this specific enablement would not have been necessary. By enabling appellate jurisdiction through the power to frame regulations under section 146 of Customs Act, 1962, which is conspicuously absent in the general power to frame rules and regulations under section 156 and 157 of Customs Act, 1962, not only is a separate framework contemplated but also limited the recourse only to the licensee. Appeal dismissed.
|