D.V.R. Freight Forwarders Pvt. Ltd vs Commissioner Of Customs (Imports)
- Case No.Appeal No.C/42580/2013
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
The appeal against a suspension order becomes infructuous once the adjudicating authority has passed a final order revoking the licence and forfeiting the security deposit, and that final order is itself under challenge in a pending writ petition before the High Court; the appeal against the suspension order is accordingly disposed of as infructuous.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SOUTH ZONAL BENCH CHENNAI
Appeal No.C/42580/2013
[Arising out of Order-in-Original No.22943/2013 dt. 12.12.2013 passed by the Commissioner of Customs (Imports),Chennai]
D.V.R. Freight Forwarders Pvt. Ltd. Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Customs (Imports), Chennai Respondent
Appearance:
Shri G.Vijayabalan, Advocate For the Appellant
Shri M. Rammohan Rao, DC(AR) For the Respondent
CORAM :
Honble Shri R. Periasami, Technical Member Honble Shri P.K. Choudhary, Judicial Member
Date of Hearing/Decision : 14.5.2015
FINAL ORDER No.40536/2015
Per R. Periasami
Appellant filed appeal against Order-in-Original No.22943/2013 dt 12.12.2013 passed by Commissioner of Customs under Regulation 19 (2) of Customs Broker Licensing Regulations, 2013 (CBLR) wherein the appellant's CHA licence was suspended with immediate effect.
2. Ld. Advocate for the appellants submits that subsequent to suspension order, the Commissioner of Customs issued Final order vide OIO No.30233/2014 dt. 20.10.2014 ordered revocation of licence under Regulation 20 (7) of CBLR, 2013 and also ordered for forfeiture of full amount of security deposit. He submits that against the above revocation order they have already filed writ petition before the Hon'ble High Court, Madras in W.P.No.28921 of 2014 which is pending before the High Court.
3. After hearing both sides, and on perusal of the records, the OIO No.30233/2014 dt. 20.10.2014 is arising out of suspension order dt. 12.12.2013 which is challenged in the present appeal. Para-16 of the OIO dt. 20.10.2014 refers to the suspension order. Appellant filed appeal against the suspension order. During pendency of appeal, the adjudicating authority has already passed final order referred to above ordering for revocation of licence and also forfeited the security deposit which is already challenged and is pending before Hon'ble High Court, Madras in W.P.No.28921 of 2014. In view of the final order dt. 20.10.2014 of Commissioner of Customs which is challenged before Madras Hon'ble High Court and is pending, the present appeal against suspension of licence has become infructuous. Accordingly the appeal is disposed as infructuous.
(Dictated and pronounced in open court)
(P.K. CHOUDHARY) (R. PERIASAMI) JUDICIAL MEMBER TECHNICAL MEMBER
gs 2
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free