Amity Logistics vs Customs, Excise and Service Tax, Appellate Tribunal, The Commissioner of Customs (Imports), The Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise and The Assistant Commissioner of Customs (CHA)

M. Jaichandren, J.—Heard the learned Counsels appearing for the Petitioner, as well as the Respondents.

The main contention of the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioner is that no opportunity had been given to the Petitioner before the order had been passed by the second Respondent, on 8.10.2010, revoking the licence granted to the Petitioner to carry on its activities, as a customs house Agent.

Against the said order the Petitioner had filed an appeal before the first Respondent, on 11.11.2010, which had been numbered as appeal No. 388/2010. Since, the first Respondent Appellate Tribunal had not granted an interim stay of the order of the second Respondent, dated 8.10.2010, the Petitioner has approached this Court by way of a writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents had submitted that the appeal, in Appeal No. 388/2010, may be directed to be disposed by the first Respondent, within a specified period.

In such circumstances, without going in to the merits of the matter, this Court finds it appropriate to direct the first Respondent to dispose of the appeal, in Appeal No. 388/2010, on merits and in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioner, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

The writ petition is disposed of, with the above directions. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.