M/S R. K. LOGISTICS vs. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

CUSAA-120/2025HC Delhi21 September 202612 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What were the facts?

The appellant, M/s R. K. Logistics, applied for a Customs Broker licence on 13.11.2014, submitting an MBA degree from Sikkim Manipal University and an affidavit stating graduation from Chaudhary Charan Singh University (CCSU), as the degree certificate was not enclosed. The licence was granted on 02.11.2016. A complaint in August 2019 alleged irregularities in the CCSU degree. CCSU verification reported discrepancies. The appellant's licence was suspended and subsequently revoked on 01.07.2020, with forfeiture of security and a penalty of Rs. 50,000 imposed, after inquiry proceedings found the graduation degree to be forged. The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal) upheld this order on 23.12.2024. The present appeal is against the Tribunal's order.

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that no substantial question of law was involved. It affirmed the concurrent factual finding by the respondent and the Tribunal that the appellant's graduation degree was forged. The court noted that the contention regarding a BBA degree from CSJMU was not raised before the Inquiry Officer, revocation proceedings, or the Tribunal, and factual matters cannot be raised in an appeal on substantial questions of law. The opportunity for cross-examination was not raised before the Inquiry Officer or the Commissioner, nor pressed before the Tribunal, and the Supreme Court's decision in Kanungo and Co. v. Collector of Customs was cited to state that cross-examination of informers is not an unfettered right. Regulation 14 of the 2018 Regulations empowers revocation and forfeiture, which was upheld. Regulation 18 allows for penalties, and its imposition is not contingent upon licence revocation. The appeal was dismissed, upholding the Tribunal's order.

What were the issues?

The Tribunal had to decide several substantial questions of law. The appellant argued: 1. Whether the Customs Broker Licensing Regulations (CBLR) permit re-verification of academic qualifications post-licence grant, and if the respondent's action was without jurisdiction (Regulation 5(h)(i) & (ii) of 2018 Regulations). 2. Whether the Tribunal erred in upholding revocation when the respondent had already verified qualifications at the time of grant (Regulation 5 of 2013 Regulations). 3. Whether the respondent could invoke CBLR provisions against an applicant for alleged discrepancies when qualifications were accepted before issuing the licence. 4. Whether re-opening verified eligibility based on an anonymous complaint was permissible. 5. Whether reliance on an inconclusive CCSU report was a perverse finding. 6. Whether the Tribunal failed to consider independent verification of the degree by other institutions. 7. Whether proceedings initiated on an anonymous, unauthenticated email were vitiated. 8. Whether penalty and forfeiture could be imposed under Regulation 18 of CBLR, 2018, exceeding prescribed limits or when no fraud was found. 9. Whether Section 132 of the Customs Act, 1962, was applicable to educational qualification verification for a licence. 10. Whether the impugned order was arbitrary, disproportionate, and violated natural justice (Articles 14 & 19(1)(g) of the Constitution). 11. Whether the order was sustainable without cross-examination of university authorities or opportunity to rebut adverse material. 12. Whether the Tribunal could apply 2018 Regulations retrospectively. The respondent did not record specific arguments but defended the revocation and penalty.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 130,Section 132

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

CUSAA 120/2025 $~14 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI %

Date of decision: 21.09.2026

# CNR No. DLHC010615972025 + CUSAA 120/2025 & CM APPL. 53151/2025

M/S R. K. LOGISTICS

.....Appellant Through: Mr. Ravi Shekhar Jha, Mr. Raj Datt, Mr. Chandan& Mr. Mohit Kumar, Advs.

versus

COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS

.....Respondent Through: Ms. Monica Benjamin, SSC with Ms. Laiba Arif & Ms. Prerika Narang, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AVNEESH JHINGAN

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHAIL JAIN AVNEESH JHINGAN, J.(ORAL)

1.

This appeal is filed under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962 (for short ‘the Act’) against the final order no. 59920/2024 dated 23.12.2024 passed by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (for brevity ‘the tribunal’) in customs appeal no. 51092/2020. 2. The brief facts are that the appellant is a proprietorship concern. On 13.11.2014, the proprietor applied for Customs Broker licence (hereinafter ‘the licence’) under the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2013 (for brevity ‘2013 Regulations’). The application form was an

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 130

All 27 judgments and leading authorities on Section 130 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →