2015 (7) TMI 59 - AT - Customs

Revocation of CHA License - Held that - Revenue is not diligently pursuing their appeal as it is apparently seen that the appeal has not been numbered and probably lying in the defects. Such casual attitude of the respondent-Commissioner is not appreciated. The learned Commissioner has also relied on the order of the Hon ble Bombay High Court in Customs Appeal No. 19/2014 dated 5.1.2015 in the case of The West End Shipping Agency , where in the case of Revenue s appeal, the Hon ble High Court have observed that where the Revenue have filed the appeal before the higher Court along with application for stay, the Tribunal should not pass drastic orders, contempt of court proceedings, etc. We find that the Hon ble High Court in the same order have also observed that they are not inclined to grant the stay of the order of the Tribunal and have further directed the respondent-Commissioner to give effect to the order of the Tribunal subject to result of pending appeal before the Hon ble High Court. - Commissioner to implement the order of the Tribunal with immediate effect within 3 days of service of a copy of this order subject to the final outcome of the appeal of the Revenue before Hon ble High Court. - Decided in favour of appellant.

Summary

Issues: Implementation of Tribunal's order, Revenue's appeal before High Court, Compliance report

In the present case, the applicant, M/s Sun Clearing & Forwarding Services Pvt. Ltd., filed an application for the implementation of the Tribunal's order dated 05.06.2014, which directed the respondent Commissioner to restore the CHA license that was revoked. The applicant moved a written representation before the Commissioner of Customs (General) for the same purpose. The Revenue, in response to the Tribunal's direction, filed a report dated 31.3.2015, stating that they had filed a Customs Appeal before the Bombay High Court on 31.10.2014. However, it was noted that the Revenue had not diligently pursued their appeal, as it had not been numbered and was likely lying in defects, indicating a casual attitude on the part of the respondent-Commissioner.

The Tribunal observed that the Revenue's casual approach was not appreciated, especially considering the importance of the matter. Reference was made to a judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in another case, where it was noted that the Tribunal should not pass drastic orders like contempt of court proceedings if the Revenue had filed an appeal before the higher court along with an application for stay. The High Court directed the respondent-Commissioner to give effect to the Tribunal's order, subject to the outcome of the pending appeal before the High Court. Consequently, the Tribunal directed the Commissioner to implement its order within three days of receiving a copy of the order, subject to the final outcome of the Revenue's appeal before the High Court, and to submit a compliance report by a specified date.

In conclusion, the Tribunal emphasized the importance of promptly implementing its orders and ensuring compliance, directing the respondent-Commissioner to adhere to the instructions within the specified timeline, taking into account the pending appeal before the High Court.