Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal
Overseas Courier Service (India) P.Ltd vs Commissioner Of Customs on 20 October, 2016
IN THE CUSTOMS, EXCISE & SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, WEST ZONAL BENCH AT MUMBAI COURT No. I Appeal No. C/1258/06 (Arising out of Order-in-Original No. CUS/50/CIC/171/06 Misc dated 29.08.2006 passed by Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai,) For approval and signature: Honble Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) Honble Mr. Raju, Member (Technical) ================================================
1. Whether Press Reporters may be allowed to see : No the Order for publication as per Rule 27 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982?
2. Whether it should be released under Rule 27 of the : No CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 for publication in any authoritative report or not?
3. Whether Their Lordships wish to see the fair copy : Seen of the Order?
4. Whether Order is to be circulated to the Departmental : Yes authorities?
Overseas Courier Service (India) P.Ltd Appellant Vs. Commissioner of Customs C.S.I., Airport, Mumbai Respondent Appearance:
None for appellant Shri M.K. Sarangi, Jt. Commr (AR) for respondent CORAM:
Honble Mr. M.V. Ravindran, Member (Judicial) Honble Mr. Raju, Member (Technical) Date of Hearing: 20.10.2016 Date of Decision: 20.10.2016 ORDER NO Per: M.V. Ravindran This appeal is directed against order-in-original No. CUS/50/CIC/171/06 Misc dated 29.08.2006.
2. None appeared on behalf of appellant. Since the matter is of 2006, we take up the same for disposal.
3. On perusal of records, we find that the issue is regarding suspension of courier licence given to appellant by impugned order.
4. Learned D.R. submits that the said courier licence which was suspended by the impugned order has been restored to the appellant by order No. 1/2006-07 issued from file No. S/V-30(77)/CCOIII/Misc./06 dated 10.01.2007. He produces copy of the letter received from the office of the Commissioner of Customs II, Airport Special Cargo Commissionerate Courier Cell, Andheri(East), Mumbai.
5. On perusal of the said letter we do find it so. Since the suspended courier licence is already restored, the appeal against the impugned order has become infructuous.
6. The appeal is dismissed as infructuous.
(operative part of the order pronounced in Court) (Raju) Member (Technical) (M.V. Ravindran) Member (Judicial) nsk 1 3 Appeal No. C/1258/06