Case Law Details
Shri Krishna Logistics Solutions Vs Commissioner of Customs (CESTAT Chennai)
The Customs, Excise, and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT) Chennai has dismissed the appeal filed by Shri Krishna Logistics Solutions against the continuation of its Customs House Agent (CHA) license suspension. The appeal was rendered infructuous as the Commissioner of Customs had already issued a final order imposing a penalty instead of revoking the license. The case initially stemmed from an order dated August 13, 2015, which upheld the suspension of the CHA license.
During proceedings, the appellant argued that since the final order (OIO No. 48262/2016) had already been issued on July 8, 2016, the appeal challenging the interim suspension was no longer relevant. The final order imposed a penalty of Rs. 50,000 but did not revoke the CHA license. Additionally, the Revenue had separately filed an appeal (C/42048/2016) before CESTAT, challenging the penalty, which remains pending. Given this legal status, the appellant submitted that continuing the appeal against the suspension had no practical effect.
The tribunal agreed with the appellant’s position, noting that the final order had effectively superseded the interim suspension order. CESTAT relied on legal principles concerning infructuous appeals, as courts and tribunals typically do not adjudicate matters that have lost their relevance due to subsequent developments. Since the penalty order replaced the suspension order, the tribunal ruled that there was no surviving issue to be decided in this appeal.
Citing the absence of any active controversy over the suspension, CESTAT dismissed the appeal as infructuous.
FULL TEXT OF THE CESTAT CHENNAI ORDER
Ld. Advocate submits that this appeal is filed by CHA against the order of Commissioner vide OIO No. 40737/2015 dated 13.08.2015 wherein the Commissioner has ordered continuation of suspension of CHA license. He further submits that, thereafter, Revenue after obtaining Inquiry Report, passed final order vide OIO No.48262/2016 dated 08.07.2016 whereby, the Commissioner has not revoked the license; however, he has imposed penalty of Rs.50,000/- on the appellant against which the Revenue has filed an Appeal before CESTAT in Appeal No.C/42048/2016 which is pending. Ld. Advocate submits that, in the above scenario, this appeal challenging the continuation of suspension of CHA license has become infructuous.
2. After hearing both sides and on perusal of records, we find that as rightly pointed out by the Ld. Advocate, since the final order is passed vide OIO No.48262/2016 dated 08.07.2016 whereby the Commissioner has imposed penalty and not revoked the license, the instant appeal becomes infructuous.
3. In view of the above, the present appeal filed by the appellant does not survive. Accordingly, the same is dismissed as infructuous.
(Order dictated and pronounced in the open court)
Author Bio
