MALABAR ENTERPRISES Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, COCHIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS stay application is filed by the applicants for waiver of pre -deposit of duty covered under the impugned order and stay of the recovery proceedings.

(2.) THE Counsel appearing for the Appellants, in support of the stay application, submitted that the demand is barred by time. He said that no allegation of suppression is effected in the Show Cause Notice and furthermore the Show Cause -cum -Demand Notice has not been served on the appellants. He also submitted that service of notice on the clearing agent cannot be said to be a service of notice on the party. In support of his contention, he referred to the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Collector of Cochin v. Trivandrum Rubber Works Limited, Chacki, reported in 1999 (106) E.L.T. 9 (S.C.) = (1999) 2 Supreme Court Cases 553. Particularly, he drew our attention to para 9 of the said order wherein it was clearly mentioned that A contract between the importer and his clearing agent, however, is a special contract under which a clearing agent is authorised to perform various functions under the Customs Act for the purpose of clearing the goods from the Customs. Once he has discharged all his duties and functions as such agent and the goods in question have been cleared and delivered to the importer/owner, his work as a clearing agent in respect of the goods ordinarily comes to an end. Any notice served on him thereafter in respect of goods already cleared cannot be construed as a notice given in the course of business of clearing the goods concerned, transacted by him for the principal.

(3.) HEARD Shri B.R. Jagadish, learned JDR for the Revenue.