2019 (11) TMI 1291 - HC - Customs

Suspension of CHA license - petition pending before High Court - extension of interim stay - HELD THAT - The Tribunal appears to have proceeded assuming that W.P.No.25727 of 2018 is still pending before High Court, without perusing the order of the High Court in WP No.25727 of 2018, by which, the learned Single Judge of this Court dismissed the writ petition by giving liberty to the appellant to approach the Tribunal and the writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn. Therefore, the very premise of the order of Tribunal as given in paragraph 7 is not correct. Therefore, the present appeal deserves to be allowed. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
1. Appeal against the Order of Commissioner of Customs dismissing stay application.
2. Interpretation of previous writ petitions and orders.
3. Tribunal's incorrect assumption regarding the status of a writ petition.
4. Appeal allowed, order set aside, matter remitted back to Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal.
5. Request for a time frame for decision due to non-functioning regular bench of CESTAT.
6. Direction to Tribunal to dispose of stay application within three months.
7. Stay on suspension of license until Tribunal's fresh order.

Analysis:

The judgment involves an appeal by M/s Transaeromarine Imex Solutions Private Ltd against the Order of the Commissioner of Customs, Chennai, dismissing their stay application regarding the suspension of their license. The appellant argued that the Tribunal erred in assuming the pendency of a writ petition, which had been withdrawn, leading to an incorrect premise in the Tribunal's order. The Court found merit in the appellant's contention and allowed the appeal, setting aside the Commissioner's order and remitting the matter back to the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal for fresh consideration on merits and in accordance with the law.

The Court noted the absence of a regular bench of CESTAT and, upon the appellant's request, fixed a time frame for the Tribunal to decide on the stay application. The Tribunal was directed to dispose of the application within three months from the judgment date. During this period, the operation of the suspension order on the appellant's license was stayed. The status of the license after three months would depend on the fresh order issued by the Tribunal. No costs were awarded, and the connected Miscellaneous Petition was closed.

In conclusion, the judgment addressed issues related to the incorrect assumption by the Tribunal, the withdrawal of the writ petition, the need for a time frame for decision due to the non-functioning regular bench of CESTAT, and the direction for the Tribunal to reconsider the stay application within a specified period while maintaining the stay on the suspension of the license until the Tribunal's fresh order.