Customs Commissioners' notices allowing direct THC payment to terminal operators upheld under Section 143AA

The Madras HC dismissed writ petitions challenging public notices issued by Customs Commissioners regarding Terminal Handling Charges (THC) collection. Petitioners contested the validity of notices allowing importers to pay THC directly to terminal operators instead of through shipping lines. The court held that Section 143AA of the Customs Act, 1962 confers independent power on the Board to implement ease of doing business measures without requiring delegation under Section 152. The notices were issued in public interest as optional facilities for importers/exporters and aligned with government policy. The court also noted forum shopping as petitioners had filed similar cases in Kerala HC on identical grounds, warranting dismissal.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Challenge to the Impugned Public Notices issued by various Commissioners of Customs.
2. Jurisdiction and authority under Section 143AA of the Customs Act, 1962.
3. Allegations of forum shopping and res judicata.

Summary:

Challenge to the Impugned Public Notices:
The petitioners challenged several Impugned Public Notices issued by different Commissioners of Customs across the country. These notices allowed importers with AEO status availing DPD facility for containerized cargo to pay Terminal Handling Charges (THC) directly to the terminal operators instead of through shipping lines, aiming to increase transparency and reduce logistics costs.

Jurisdiction and Authority under Section 143AA of the Customs Act, 1962:
The primary argument was that the Impugned Public Notices were issued without proper authority and contrary to the Customs Act, 1962. The petitioners contended that the notices were not backed by any order from the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) as required under Section 143AA, nor was there any delegation of power under Section 152. The respondents defended the notices, stating they were issued based on a letter dated 13.01.2020 from the Chairman of CBIC, which aimed to implement Section 143AA by reducing transaction costs and facilitating trade. The court found that Section 143AA is a non-obstante provision empowering the Board to take measures to reduce transaction costs and that the letter from the Chairman was sufficient to justify the issuance of the notices.

Allegations of Forum Shopping and Res Judicata:
The petitioners had previously filed similar cases before the Kerala High Court, which were dismissed. The court noted that the petitioners' actions amounted to forum shopping and that the writ petitions were liable to be dismissed on the grounds of res judicata and forum shopping.

Conclusion:
The court concluded that the Impugned Public Notices were issued in line with the objectives of Section 143AA of the Customs Act, 1962, and were not arbitrary. The petitions were dismissed on the merits and on the grounds of forum shopping.

---