9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 981X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... While Mr. Kiran submits the suspension order has not only adversely affected its interest, but also against the interest of several customers in India who have indented medicines as also abroad, Mr. Dinesh Kumar for the Revenue submits respondents are very much willing to permit the petitioner to clear its consignments which had been received as on date. The writ petition is rejected. However, respondents are directed to permit the petitioner to get the consignments, cleared as stated in the letter dated 19-3-2014 if the petitioner complies. - Decided against the appellants. - W.P. No. 13335 of 2014 (T) - - - Dated:- 20-3-2014 - Jawad Rahim, J. Shri Kiran S. Javali, Advocate, for the Petitioner. Shri Dinesh Kumar P.S., Advocate, for the Respondent. ORDER Petitioner, a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956, and a licenced courier under the provisions of the Courier Imports and Exports (Clearance) Regulations, 1998 (hereinafter referred to as the Regulations, for brevity), has, in this writ action, brought in question the order dated 14-3-2014 in No. VIII/48/79/2002, Cus. Tech (Courier) at Annexure-B suspending the licence issue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an K. Nair, Service Centre Manager and Ravishankar S-courier boy of the petitioner were recorded. The statements so given brought out that the petitioner had not obtained any authorization from the consignee - M/s. Rotmac Distributors. The antecedents, IEC number, address, etc. was not verified by the petitioner and the consignments imported in the past were also from the same consignor which appears to have not been delivered at the door of the consignee. 7. Based on this material, the officers opined Regulation 13(a) of the Regulations was attracted and the petitioner was liable to discharge the obligation imposed on it under the said provision. The officers also opined Regulation 14(1) had to be invoked which provides for revocation of registration of licence for acts of malfeasance and misfeasance. For such reasons, the Commissioner of Customs has passed the impugned order suspending the licence of the petitioner which is brought in question. 8. Mr. Kiran Javali submits, the role of the petitioner is very limited. The petitioner is merely a courier which receives consignment from the consignor and delivers it to the consignee and is not expected to, or knows about the con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y and effectually co-operate and ensure there is no recurrence of such act. He submits, the petitioner is not prima facie found to have indulged in failure to comply with any of the conditions mentioned in Regulation 11 and is not shown to have failed to comply with any of the regulations nor there is any misconduct. Mere random discovery by the authorities cannot be used against the petitioner to deprive it of the licence obtained under law. He submits, similar attempt was made by the officers on 5-2-2014 regarding the consignment in Air Waybill No. 5707780164, but on checking they found nothing wrong. He has narrated other references also to show that the petitioner has not indulged in any illegal act. 11. The last ground urged is, because of suspension the entire business activity has come to a standstill affecting employees and survival of officials and officers including day-to-day operation of releasing the consignment. He would submit, hundreds of consignment received in the territory of India are held by the Customs Department and petitioner is unable to process it because licence is suspended consequent to which consignees are likely to suffer. He struck an emotional no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an authorization from each of the consignees of the import goods for whom such courier has imported such goods or consignors of such export goods which such courier proposes to export, to the effect that the authorized courier may act as agent of such consignee or consignor, as the case may be, for clearance of such import or export goods by the proper officer; (b) . (i) verify the antecedent, correctness of Importer Export Code (IEC) number, identity of his client and the functioning of his client in the declared address by using reliable, independent authentic documents, data or information. Keeping Regulation 13 cited above would certainly show that by a legal fiction the petitioner steps into the shoes of the exporter or importer and has legal responsibility which crystalizes into legal liability to answer any contravention or fraud or, for that matter, any criminality in conduct. As of now, we notice one of the consignments was found to contain contraband of 7 kgs. gold valued at ₹ 2,14,27,000/-. Thus prima facie there is criminality. The petitioner if not directly vicariously becomes liable for such act and therefore has to answer. Regulation 14 conf ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to agree with the contention of Mr. Kiran Javali for the reason while the proviso provides for and confers jurisdiction on the Commissioner to order suspension, the second part of the same proviso confers right on the person affected, like the authorized courier, to apply to the Chief Commissioner in writing against such order and time stipulation is also given. Therefore, it is sufficient efficacious remedy provided against suspension of licence ordered under Regulation 14 referred to supra. In this view, it cannot be said that the petitioner has no alternate efficacious remedy except filing of writ petition. 18. Be that as it may, we have to see equity and possible hardship to the bona fide consignees. While Mr. Kiran submits the suspension order has not only adversely affected its interest, but also against the interest of several customers in India who have indented medicines as also abroad, Mr. Dinesh Kumar for the Revenue submits respondents are very much willing to permit the petitioner to clear its consignments which had been received as on date. He brings to my notice the communication addressed by the 2nd respondent to the petitioner which reads thus : To, Shri N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
