Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

1985 (1) TMI 321

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... artmental Representative has appeared on behalf of the respondent. Shri A.K. Chatterjee, the learned J.D.R. has raised a preliminary objection that the appeal presented on the 21st April, 1983, is not in order as the appeal has been signed and verified by the Clearing Agent and the same is not in accordance with Customs (Appeals) Rules, 1982 vide G.S.R. No. 564-E. The learned J.D.R. has pleaded that as per rule 6 read with sub-rule (2) of Rule 3 of the Customs (Appeals) Rules, 1982, the appeal should have been signed by the principal officer of the company whereas in the instant case, the appeal has been signed by the Clearing agent and the clearing agent is not an aggrieved person and the appeal presented on the 21st April, 1983 is null an .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he agent has been authorised to deal with them for the purposes of the Sea Customs Act or any of its provisions. Section 4 clearly lays down a fiction, that if the agent is authorised by the real owner in respect of any of the matters in the Act, the Customs authorities would deal with the agent as if he were the owner. The effect of fiction is, therefore, to make an agent answerable to the Customs authorities within the four corners of his authorisation. The fiction operates only within those limits. An agent may be authorised to declare the real value and to pay customs duty or other charges. If an agent is authorised in this manner, under the fiction created by S. 4, he would be regarded as the owner and would be dealt with as such, by .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... d mistake, is no excuse for the condonation of delay. 4. In reply, Shri A.K. Chatterjee, the learned J.D.R. has again stated that the clearing agent does not get inherent right merely because the copy has been sent to him. The clearing agent has to establish that he has got legal grievance. He has pleaded that the appeal filed on the 21st April, 1983 is a nullity in the eyes of law and the same should be dismissed. 5. After hearing both the sides and going through the facts and circumstances of case, I would like to observe that present appeal filed on 21st April, 1983 is not a transferred matter. It is a fresh appeal filed on Form No. C.A.-3 before the Tribunal. The Appeal Rules have come into force with effect from 11th October, 198 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ellate Tribunal :- (1) An appeal under sub-section (1) of section 129A to the Appellate Tribunal shall be made in Form No. C.A.-3. (2) A memorandum or cross-objections to the Appellate Tribunal under sub-section (4) of section 129A shall be made in Form No. C.A.-4. (3) Where an appeal under sub-section (1) of Section 129A or a memorandum of cross-objections under sub-section (4) of that Section is made by any person other than the Collector of Customs, the grounds of appeal, the grounds of cross-objections and the forms of verification as contained in Form Nos. C.A.-3 and C.A.-4, as the case may be respectively shall be signed by the person specified in sub-rule (2) of rule 3. (4) The form of appeal in Form No. C.A.-3 and the form .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e the revision application was signed by the clearing agent and there were no Appeal Rules in force at that time and no procedure was prescribed by the law. I very respectfully agree with the findings in the judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court cited by the learned consultant reported in 1960 AIR S.C. 62. That judgment is helpful only in those cases, where no Appeal Rules have been made. I would also like to refer a Special Bench decision in the case of V. V. Dabke Sons, Bombay v. Collector of Customs, Bombay, reported in 1983 E.L.T. 583 wherein the Hon ble Bench had held that there is no provision under the Customs Act or the Customs (Appeal) Rules whereby it can be contemplated that an agent can file an appeal in his own rights. Theref .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates