Case Details: Commissioner of Customs (Airport and General), New Delhi vs. A.T.R. Logistics India Pvt. Ltd. (2025) 35 Centax 202 (Del.)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Prathiba M. Singh & Rajneesh Kumar Gupta, JJ.
- S/Shri Harpreet Singh, SSC with Ms Suhani Mathur & Jai Ahuja, Advs., for the Appellant.
- None, for the Respondent
Facts of the Case
The Department filed an appeal before the Delhi High Court under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962 challenging the CESTAT’s Final Order. The CESTAT had dismissed the Department’s appeal as not maintainable, holding that an appeal filed by the Commissioner of Customs against an order issued under Regulation 19 of the Customs Brokers Licensing Regulations, 2018 (CBLR, 2018) is not permissible. The CESTAT relied on the Delhi High Court’s earlier ruling in Commissioner of Customs v. Transworld Cargo & Travels, which held that only the Customs Broker, and not the Department, can appeal against orders passed under the CBLR. The Department argued that similar matters are pending before the Supreme Court in Falcon India (SLP No. 14955/2022).
High Court Held
The Delhi High Court upheld the CESTAT order, reiterating that under Regulation 19 of the CBLR, 2018, only the Customs Broker is entitled to file an appeal before CESTAT, and the Department has no right to appeal such orders. The Court followed consistent precedents of coordinate benches holding that Revenue cannot challenge orders passed under CBLR before CESTAT. Accordingly, the Department’s appeal was dismissed, with liberty to seek revival before CESTAT if the Supreme Court later rules that such appeals by the Department are maintainable.
List of Cases Reviewed
- Order No. FO/ C/A/ 58753 / 2024-CU [DB] dated 24th September, 2024 passed by CESTAT – — Affirmed [Para 7]
List of Cases Cited
- Commissioner v. Transworld Cargo & Travels — (2023) 10 Centax 122 (Del.) — Followed [Paras 5, 7]
- Commissioner v. Falcon India — (2025) 36 Centax 327 (S.C.) — Noted [Para 6]
