Authority of clearing agent to pursue refund claims failed where no importer authorisation or valid verification was shown.

A clearing agent could not maintain a refund claim or prosecute subsequent appeals in its own name without clear proof of authority from the importer. Where proceedings are instituted through an agent, the record must show that the principal acted through a duly constituted agent; absent such authorisation, the agent has no independent standing under the Customs Act, 1962 and the Customs (Appeals) Rules, 1982. The appeal papers were also defective because they were signed by a partner of the clearing agent instead of the principal officer, and no letter of authority from the importer was produced. The refund application and appeals were therefore not maintainable in law.

---

---

Issues: Whether a clearing agent could maintain a refund application and the subsequent appeals in its own name without proof of authority from the importer, and whether the appeal papers were validly verified and signed.

Analysis: The appellant failed to show that it was duly authorised by the importer when the refund claim and appeals were filed. The proceeding, if instituted through an agent, had to be clearly shown as one by the principal acting through a duly constituted agent. Under the Customs Act, 1962, and the Customs (Appeals) Rules, 1982, the agent could not prosecute the matter in its own right, and in the case of a company the verification had to be signed by the principal officer. The appeal documents were signed by a partner of the clearing agent, and no letter of authority from the importer was produced.

Conclusion: The refund application and the subsequent appeals were not maintainable in law, and the appeal was dismissed.

---