Courier Imports and Exports (Clearance) Regulations, 1998 › Courier Imports and Exports (Clearance) Regulations, 1998
Regulation 14. Deregistration
Courier Imports and Exports (Clearance) Regulations, 1998
Official text
Regulation 14. Deregistration. —
(1) The PrincipalCommissioner of Customs or Commissioner of Customs, as the case may be mayrevoke the registration of an Authorised Courier and also order forefeiture of security on any of the following grounds, namely:-
(a) failure of theAuthorised Courier to comply with any of the conditions of the bond executed byhim under Regulation 11;
(b) failure of theAuthorised Courier to comply with any of the provisions of these regulations;
(c)misconduct on the part of Authorised Courier whether within the jurisdiction ofthe said Principal Commissioner or Commissioner of anywhere else,which in the opinion of the Principal Commissioner or Commissioner renders him unfit to transact any business in the Customs Station:
Provided thatno such revocation shall be made unless a notice has been issued to theAuthorised Courier informing him the grounds on which it is proposed to revokethe registration and he is given an opportunity of making a representation inwriting and a further opportunity of being heard in the matter, if so desired:
Provided furtherthat, in case the Principal Commissioner of Customs orCommissioner of Customs, as the case may be considers that any of such groundsagainst an Authorised Courier shall not be established prima facie withoutan inquiry in the matter, he may conduct the inquiry to determine the groundand in the meanwhile pending the completion of such inquiry, may suspend theregistration of the Authorised Courier. If no ground is established against theAuthorised Courier, the registration so suspended shall be restored.
(2) Any AuthorisedCourier or the officer of the Customs authorised by the PrincipalChief Commissioner of Customs or Chief Commissioner of Customs, as the case maybe in this behalf, if aggrieved by the order of the PrincipalCommissioner of Customs or Commissioner of Customs, as the case may be passed undersub-regulation (1), may represent to the Principal ChiefCommissioner of Customs or Chief Commissioner of Customs, as the case may be in writing against such order within sixty days of communication of theimpugned order to the Authorised Courier and the Principal ChiefCommissioner of Customs or Chief Commissioner of Customs, as the case may be shall, after providing the opportunity of being heard to the parties concerned,dispose of the representation as expeditiously as may be possible.
Judgments on Regulation 14
- Chennai(Air Port & Cargo) vs Total Courier And Cargo Services Pvt Ltd — CESTAT, 26 Feb 2024. Against a Commissioner of Customs' order passed under sub-regulation (1) of Regulation 14 of the Courier Imports and Exports (Clearance) Regulations, 1998, the only remedy is a written representation to the Chief…
- Ups Jetair Express Pvt Ltd vs Cc Air Cargo Ch - Vii — CESTAT, 21 Aug 2023. Revocation of an authorized courier's registration cannot be sustained where the SCN establishes no overt act or knowledge of the company itself and the misconduct is that of a lone employee, but failure to obtain…
- The Commissioner Of Customs (Ii) Zone… vs Poonma Courier Pvt. Limited — Bombay High Court, 3 Nov 2020. A remedy of representation provided by subordinate legislation (Regulation 14(2) of the Courier Regulations, 1998) is supplementary and cannot supplant or curtail the vested statutory right of appeal to CESTAT under…
- Aramex India Pvt. Ltd vs Commissioner Of Customs — CESTAT, 16 Sep 2016. A courier licence cannot be revoked for the fraudulent acts of employees committed on their own for personal gain outside the scope of employment where the company itself was not complicit, as revocation in such…
- Tnt India Pvt Ltd vs Principal Commissioner Of Customs(Ii)… — Bombay High Court, 12 Oct 2015. Suspension of an authorised courier's registration under the second proviso to Regulation 14(1) of the Courier Imports and Exports (Clearance) Regulations, 1998 is valid only pending an inquiry into revocation grounds…