2016 (11) TMI 850 - AT - Customs

Debarring of CHA from undertaking any customs work in the said Custom House - contravention of Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations - Held that - the preliminary objection taken by learned D.R. that no appeal lies against the administrative order is incorrect inasmuch as the letter issued by the office of the Principal Commissioner of Customs specifically refers to the show-cause notice issued by DRI and also the inquiry conducted against M/s. DVS under CBLR which would amount that the activity of debarring appellant is in respect of provisions of Customs Act and Rules & Regulations made thereof. In our view this is not an administrative order but an order which is appealable before the Tribunal. Reliance placed on the decision of the case of Krishna Hirlekar 1995 (10) TMI 171 - CEGAT, BOMBAY where it was held that the proceedings resulting in the passing of the impugned order were mainly against the CHA as per the CHA Regulations. These regulations do not contemplate debarring of the employees under any provisions of the Regulations. The employee of the CH Agents firm are issued with identity passes by the Asst. Collector and cancellation of any identity passes was not the issue before the Collector. Moreover both these appellants were neither party to the proceedings in terms of the Custom House Agents Regulations, nor were they issued notices, proposing revocation of their passes. Hence the order contained in Para 23 adversely affecting these two appellants has been passed in gross violation of the principles of natural justice and is also not falling within the purview of the proceedings under CHA Regulations against the CHA firm. The impugned order is unsustainable and set aside the same with direction to the Principal Commissioner of Customs that the licence of the appellant be restored and he be permitted to conduct the activity as a Customs Broker in the New Customs House, Mumbai - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
Debarment of appellant from customs work based on administrative action without a show-cause notice, appealability of the order, violation of principles of natural justice.

Analysis:
The appeal challenged the debarment of the appellant from customs work by the office of the Principal Commissioner of Customs without issuing a show-cause notice. The Inquiry Officer recommended action against the Director of the Customs Broker firm, which led to the appellant's debarment. The appellant argued that the debarment was not in accordance with the law as no charges were levied against him directly. The appellant relied on a previous Tribunal decision to support the argument. The Departmental Representative contended that the debarment was an administrative action and not appealable. However, the Tribunal found that the debarment was related to provisions of the Customs Act and Rules, making it appealable.

Regarding the violation of natural justice, the Tribunal referred to a previous case where it was held that the debarring of employees under the Customs House Agents Regulations was not contemplated, and such actions were a violation of natural justice. The Tribunal found merit in the appellant's contentions and set aside the impugned order. The Tribunal directed the Principal Commissioner of Customs to restore the appellant's license and permit them to resume customs broker activities in the New Custom House, Mumbai.

In conclusion, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the debarment order and directing the restoration of the appellant's license to conduct customs broker activities.