2019 (5) TMI 523 - AT - Customs

Customs Broker License - Right of revenue to file an appeal - appeal against the proceedings dropped by the Commissioner of Customs in the impugned order in terms of Regulation 21 of Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013 - Whether an appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable under Section 129A of the Customs Act against the Order of Commissioner of Customs passed under Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations or not? HELD THAT - As per Section 146 (2) of the Customs Act, 1962, the Legislature have empowered the broad the procedure of appeal to be filed against an order of suspension of revocation of license. Admittedly, as per the said provisions, an appeal can be filed before this Tribunal against the revocation of Customs Broker License and it is not the case of revocation of suspension of Customs Broker Licenses. In fact, the proceedings initiated against the customs broker has been dropped by the impugned order by the Commissioner of Customs. An identical issue has been examined by this Tribunal in the case of CCE, (Import General), New Delhi vs. PSB Logistics Pvt. Ltd. 2017 (11) TMI 553 - CESTAT NEW DELHI , wherein this Tribunal has held that Revenue cannot file appeal against the order of the Commissioner issued under CHALR, 2004. The appeal is not maintainable against the impugned order before this Tribunal - Appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues involved:
Whether an appeal filed by the Revenue is maintainable under Section 129A of the Customs Act against the Order of Commissioner of Customs passed under Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations or not?

In the case at hand, the Revenue appealed against an order where proceedings against the respondent were dropped by the Commissioner of Customs under Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013. The respondent contended that the appeal was not maintainable as per Regulation 21 of the said Regulations, which allows only Customs Brokers or 'F' Card holders to appeal against orders passed by the Commissioner of Customs. The Revenue argued that the appeal was maintainable under Section 129A of the Customs Act, emphasizing that the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations are subordinate legislation, and the appeal was filed under the Customs Act, which has the mandate from the Parliament of India. The Revenue cited various legal precedents to support its argument, including decisions by the Tribunal and the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay. The Revenue also relied on a Larger Bench decision of the Tribunal and a Supreme Court decision to assert that regulations made under the power conferred by statute are supporting legislation and have the force and effect if validly made.

The Tribunal examined the issue of whether the appeal filed by the Revenue was maintainable under Section 129A of the Customs Act against the Commissioner of Customs' order passed under the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations. The Tribunal referred to the observations of the Hon'ble Apex Court regarding delegated legislation and the purpose of regulations in aiding the enforcement of statutory provisions. The Tribunal analyzed the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations and Section 146(2) of the Customs Act, which empowers the procedure for filing appeals against orders of suspension or revocation of licenses. It was noted that the Regulations allowed for appeals by Customs Brokers against orders of the Commissioner of Customs, but did not provide for appeals by the Revenue in cases where proceedings against Customs Brokers were dropped. The Tribunal cited previous decisions where it was held that the Revenue cannot file appeals against orders of the Commissioner under the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal and stay application by the Revenue, agreeing with the preliminary objection raised by the respondent's counsel.

In conclusion, the Tribunal held that the appeal filed by the Revenue against the order where proceedings against the respondent were dropped by the Commissioner of Customs under the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations was not maintainable under Section 129A of the Customs Act. The Tribunal based its decision on the lack of provision for the Revenue to appeal in such cases under the Regulations, emphasizing that the appeal remedy contained in the Regulations itself needed to be interpreted. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal and the Stay Application by the Revenue as not maintainable, upholding the preliminary objection raised by the respondent's counsel.