N. KUNJAN PILLAI Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, COCHIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY the impugned Order -in -Original No. 56/2005, dated 7 -12 -2005, the Commissioner of Customs has revoked the licence of the appellants, CHA in terms of the Regulation 22(c) of Custom House Agents Licensing Regulations (CHALR), 2004. This is a second round of litigation. The matter had been remanded by the Tribunal for de novo consideration with regard to the allegation that the appellant had operated their licence through unauthorised persons and had not handled the customs documents and clearance work directly. He had not complied with the Regulation 13(a) of the CHALR, 2004.

(2.) THE appellant had denied the allegation that they had allowed any unauthorised persons to handle the unaccompanied baggage filed on behalf of one Ashkar Nangrath. Their contention was that they had only one Shri V. A. Mary Das as a canvassing agent only. He was not authorised to appear before the custom authorities and he has not done so at all. The said baggage was handled by their authorised clerk Shri Shan Kumar. The appellant pointed out that there was no evidence relied by the Revenue to substantiate the charge brought against them. However, their plea has been turned down by the Commissioner. He had only drawn a conjecture that the behaviour of CHA leaves one to conclude that somebody else who had acquaintance with the passenger and the examination formalities was present in the examination hall to arrange the packages for examination and for loading the packages in the lorry. He has noted that there is any consistency in the statements about the relationship the CHA had with V. A. Mary Das, the behaviour of Shan Kumar and therefore it leads to conclusion that the one Shri P. A. Gigesh who was the holder of H Card and subsequently left the appellants service was engaged to attend the Customs work relating to the package in question.

(3.) WE have heard both sides in the matter.