TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1985 (1) TMI 321
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... behalf of the appellant and Shri A.K. Chatterjee, the learned Junior Departmental Representative has appeared on behalf of the respondent. Shri A.K. Chatterjee, the learned J.D.R. has raised a preliminary objection that the appeal presented on the 21st April, 1983, is not in order as the appeal has been signed and verified by the Clearing Agent and the same is not in accordance with Customs (Appeals) Rules, 1982 vide G.S.R. No. 564-E. The learned J.D.R. has pleaded that as per rule 6 read with sub-rule (2) of Rule 3 of the Customs (Appeals) Rules, 1982, the appeal should have been signed by the principal officer of the company whereas in the instant case, the appeal has been signed by the Clearing agent and the clearing agent is not an agg....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....stoms authorities may have no dealing with the real owner of the goods where the ' agent has been authorised to deal with them for the purposes of the Sea Customs Act or any of its provisions. Section 4 clearly lays down a fiction, that if the agent is authorised by the real owner in respect of any of the matters in the Act, the Customs authorities would deal with the agent as if he were the owner. The effect of fiction is, therefore, to make an agent answerable to the Customs authorities within the four corners of his authorisation. The fiction operates only within those limits. An agent may be authorised to declare the real value and to pay customs duty or other charges. If an agent is authorised in this manner, under the fiction created ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... On the objection of the learned J.D.R., the learned Consultant has conceded that the ignorance of law and mistake, is no excuse for the condonation of delay. 4. In reply, Shri A.K. Chatterjee, the learned J.D.R. has again stated that the clearing agent does not get inherent right merely because the copy has been sent to him. The clearing agent has to establish that he has got legal grievance. He has pleaded that the appeal filed on the 21st April, 1983 is a nullity in the eyes of law and the same should be dismissed. 5. After hearing both the sides and going through the facts and circumstances of case, I would like to observe that present appeal filed on 21st April, 1983 is not a transferred matter. It is a fresh appeal ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....No. C.A.-l shall be filed in duplicate and shall be accompanied by a copy of the decision or order appealed against." "6. Form of appeals, etc., to the Appellate Tribunal :- (1) An appeal under sub-section (1) of section 129A to the Appellate Tribunal shall be made in Form No. C.A.-3. (2) A memorandum or cross-objections to the Appellate Tribunal under sub-section (4) of section 129A shall be made in Form No. C.A.-4. (3) Where an appeal under sub-section (1) of Section 129A or a memorandum of cross-objections under sub-section (4) of that Section is made by any person other than the Collector of Customs, the grounds of appeal, the grounds of cross-objections and the forms of verification as contained in Form Nos. C.A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed this issue in Appeal No. C.D.(T)CAL-173/80 in the case of M/s. Harshadray M. Doshi v. Collector of Customs, Calcutta vide Order No. 343, dated 1st September, 1984. In that case the revision application was signed by the clearing agent and there were no Appeal Rules in force at that time and no procedure was prescribed by the law. I very respectfully agree with the findings in the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court cited by the learned consultant reported in 1960 AIR S.C. 62. That judgment is helpful only in those cases, where no Appeal Rules have been made. I would also like to refer a Special Bench decision in the case of V. V. Dabke & Sons, Bombay v. Collector of Customs, Bombay, reported in 1983 E.L.T. 583 wherein the Hon'ble Bench....