9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (7) TMI 912X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for consideration of application made in Annexure-B for renewal - appellant, therefore, is entitled for consideration of application made in Annexure-B for renewal. Appeal allowed. - CUS.APPEAL NO. 5 OF 2021 - - - Dated:- 8-7-2021 - THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS APPELLANTS: P.A.AUGUSTIAN AND SMT.SWATHY E.S. OTHER PRESENT: SR SC SREELAL WARRIER JUDGMENT S.V. Bhatti, J. Heard learned Advocates Mr. P A Augustine and Mr. Sreelal Warrier for the parties. 2. The appellant before the Customs, Excise Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) in File No.C/20445/2020 has filed the instant Customs Appeal under Section 130 of the Customs Act, 1962 (for sho ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sional order in Annexure-C is confirmed in Annexure-D dated 19.05.2020. The appellant filed Customs Appeal No.20179/2020 before the CESTAT, Bangalore. The Appellate Tribunal, through final order in Annexure-F held as follows: Further we find that the show-cause notice issued to the appellant by Trichy Commissionerate is pending before the High Court of Madras (Madurai Bench). In view of the above, we are of the considered view that during the pendency of the enquiry ordered by the Commissioner of Customs, the Commissioner should not have denied the renewal, more country on account of spread of pandemic Covid 19 during which the appellant is supposed to pay the wages to its employees as per the instruction issued by the Government of Ind ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CBLR 2018. c) Impose penalty of ₹ 50,000/- under Regulation 18 of CBLR 2018. 3.2 The appellant filed appeal before the CESTAT in File No.C/20445/2020 and, as noted above, the Tribunal set aside the order dated 16.11.2020 (Annexure-I). However, called upon the appellant to apply afresh for CHA Licence. After examining the chronology of events, implication of orders of the Appellate Tribunal made from time-to-time, we are of the view that the Tribunal, by observing as noted above, failed to exercise the jurisdiction conferred on it while disposing of the appeal filed by the appellant. Hence the instant Customs Appeal. 4. Advocate P A Augustine argues that the CESTAT, on one hand, has given the relief to appellant by setting as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the application is made afresh. 6. We have perused the record and while examining the desirability, we appreciate the orders made by the CESTAT, both at the time when the order is made and appreciate the orders by giving cumulative effect to each one the orders made by the Tribunal and findings recorded. The simple affect of the adjudication of CESTAT is that the orders of respondent, either placing the appellant under suspension or denying renewal or confirming the decisions taken, are all set aside. There is nothing against the appellant as on date warranting the appellant to apply afresh for CHA licence. The directions are inconsistent with final orders of the CESTAT. The appellant, therefore, is entitled for consideration of applica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
