Page 123 - ELT_1st July 2020_Vol 373_Part 1

2020 ] CENTRAL BOARD OF CUS. & C. EX., NEW DELHI v. T. RADHAKRISHNAN 33

Science also, which the petitioner did admittedly satisfy. The words ‘such as’ be-
fore the word ‘Masters’ cannot obliterate the word ‘or’ and the respondent cannot
be compelled to have Masters Degree in Accounting/Finance/Management.
8. We further find that in the same clause (ii) of 5(f) of CBLR, that, even
the persons who do not possess any of these qualifications, as stipulated in
clause (ii), but having two years experience in transacting Customs Broker work
as G-Card Holder also are entitled to appear in the said examination. We further
find that clause ‘(f)’ before its clauses (i) and (ii) is prefaced by the words, “ an
individual applicant or in case the applicant is a firm or company, its partner or director
or an authorized employee, who may handle the Customs work shall:...”. Therefore, ap-
parently even a partner or director of a partnership firm or a company having
sufficient experience, can apply provided, he is a graduate and holds a Masters
Degree in any subject or an equivalent degree in Accounting/Finance or Man-
agement, CA/MBA/LLB... etc.
9. Before the words ‘is having at least two years experience in transacting
Customs Broker work as G-Card holder,’ also, there is another “or” in clause (ii) of
clause 5(f) of CBLR. Thus, obviously clause (ii) is in three parts and it permits a
person holding (1) Master Degree in any subjects or (2) an equivalent to Masters
Degree in Accounting/Management/Finance etc., or (3) having an experience of
two years as G-Card holder, thus a mixture of three categories with no watertight
silos in these categories, are given as criteria to apply for such Customs Broker
License under CBLR. In view of this, the contention of the Learned Counsel for
the appellant/Revenue that the words ‘such as’ before the word ‘Masters’ in part
of clause (ii) should be read with the subjects like Accounting/Finance or Man-
agement is not found to be a tenable contention.
10. Moreso, a person with experience of two years in transacting Cus-
toms Broker work as G-Card Holder is eligible to apply for the said examination.
We may further note that a licencee under CBLR is not for giving any employ-
ment in the Customs Department, as such, but is just a license to undertake the
said profession in the premises or jurisdiction of the Customs Department. It is
the fundamental right to carry on such profession or business under Article
19(1)(g) of Constitution of India, subject to ‘reasonable restrictions’ as imposed
under Article 19(1) sub-clause (g) of the Constitution of India. The prescribing of
the eligibility in the Regulations, of course is not questionable, but a distorted
and pedantic interpretation of the same is certainly incorrect and not sustainable.
11. Reverting back to the facts of the case, we find that the respondent
herein, Mr. T. Radhakrishnan, prima facie appears to be a highly qualified person
or rather overly qualified to hold the Customs Broker Licence, and he fulfils the
criteria of eligibility as given in clause 5 of CBLR itself. Therefore, we fail to un-
derstand the reason of assailing the order of Learned Single Judge by the Reve-
nue Department. We cannot appreciate such an instance on the part of the re-
sponsible Revenue Department of the Central Government.
12. Therefore, we do not find any merit in the present Writ Appeal filed
by the Customs and Excise Department and the Appeal is liable to be dismissed,
accordingly the same is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected CMP No.
5454 of 2020 is also closed.

_______

EXCISE LAW TIMES  1st July 2020  123