1993 (6) TMI 83

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Licensing Regulations, 1965 could be called upon to apply anew for a fresh licence under the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 1984. 3. The facts of this case briefly are that the petitioner-firm was originally constituted by one K.C. Mullick and P.N. Mullick. Both K.C. Mullick and P.N. Mullick were licensed to carry on business as Customs House Clearing Agents. Kishore Mullick being petitioner No. 2 was inducted into the firm. In 1979 an 'A' Class licence was granted to Kishore Mullick a copy of which has been annexed to the petition. The licence was renewed from time to time. The licence, granted to the firm under the 1965 Regulations, originally showed K.C. Mullick and P.N. Mullick as the persons authorised to transact busin....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the petitioner No. 2's name to be incorporated in the licence as an authorised person. 5. The submissions of the Customs Authorities are not acceptable to this Court. Regulation 26 of the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 1984 which repeals 1965 Regulations provides, "Notwithstanding such repeal anything done or any action taken under the Customs House Agents Licensing Regulations, 1965, shall be deemed to have been done or taken under the corresponding provisions of these regulations." 6. Therefore, the grant of licence under the 1965 Regulations to Kishore Mullick would be deemed to have been taken or done under the 1984 Regulations. There is nothing in the Regulations which shows that licence-holders under the 1965 Regul....