CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL NEW DELHI PRINCIPAL BENCH - COURT NO. 1 CUSTOMS APPEAL NO. 51152 OF 2025 (Arising out of Order-In-Original No. 36/ZR/POLICY/2024 dated 13.05.2024 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Airport & General) New Customs House, New Delhi)

M/s Navalai Enterprises ...… Appellant L-184, L-Block Gali No. 1, Mahipalpur Extn, New Delhi- 110037 Versus Commissioner of Customs …… Respondent (Airport & General), New Customs House, Near IGI Airport, New Delhi- 110037 APPEARANCE Shri P. Pathak, consultant and Shri Ajay Kumar, advocate for the applicant Shri M.K. Shukla, authorised representative of the department CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DILIP GUPTA, PRESIDENT HON’BLE MR. P. V SUBBA RAO, MEMBER (TECHNICAL)

FINAL ORDER NO. 50178/2026 DATE OF HEARING/DECISION : January 15, 2026 JUSTICE DILIP GUPTA :

This appeal has been filed by M/s Navalai Enterprises¹ to assail the order dated May 13, 2024 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Airport & General), New Delhi² by which the permission accorded to the appellant under the provisions of the Courier Imports and Exports (Electronic Declaration and Processing) Regulations, 2010³ has been revoked. The order also forfeits the security amount deposited by the appellant at the time of issuing of

1. the appellant

2. the Commissioner

3. the 2010 Regulations the registration and also imposes a penalty under regulation 14 of the 2010 Regulations.

2. It transpires from the records that against the said order of the Commissioner, the appellant made a representation to the Chief Commissioner of Customs under regulation 13(2) of the 2010 Regulations and this representation has been rejected by the Chief Commissioner by an order dated 09.09.2024. This order of the Chief Commissioner has not been assailed in this appeal.

3. Shri M.K. Shukla, learned authorised representative appearing for the department has raised a preliminary objection that this appeal filed by the appellant under section 129A of the Customs Act, 1962⁴ is not maintainable.

4. Shri P. Pathak, learned consultant assisted by Shri Ajay Kumar, learned counsel for the appellant has stated that the present appeal filed by the appellant under section 129A of the Customs Act is maintainable. Learned consultant pointed out that the order passed by the Commissioner should be termed as an order passed by the adjudicating authority under section 129A(1)(a) of the Customs Act and, therefore, the appeal would be maintainable.

5. The preliminary objection raised by the learned authorised representative appearing for the department needs to be considered first because if the appeal is not maintainable, it would not be necessary to examine the merits of the case.

6. The 2010 Regulations have been framed in exercise of the powers conferred upon the Central Board of Excise and Customs under section 157 of the Customs Act.

7. These 2010 Regulations apply for assessment and clearance of the imported or export goods, carried by an Authorized Courier by

4. the Customs Act

air, on behalf of a consignment or consignor at such Customs airports and in such form and to such extent, as the Board may, by notification, declare for the purposes of these regulations in this behalf.

8. Regulation 5 deals with ‘Clearance of Imported Goods’ and Regulation 6 deals with ‘Clearance of Export Goods’. Registration of a person is contemplated under Regulation 10. Regulation 12 deals with ‘Obligations of Authorised Courier’. Regulation 13 deals with ‘Suspension or Revocation of Registration of Authorised Courier’.

Regulation 13 is reproduced below:

“13. Suspension or revocation of registration of authorised courier.

(1) The Commissioner of Customs may revoke the registration of an Authorised Courier and also pass an order for forfeiture of security on any of the following grounds namely:-

(a) failure of the Authorised Courier to comply with any of the conditions of the bond executed by him under regulation 11; (b) failure of the Authorised Courier to comply