Remand of customs orders leaves dispute for Tribunal review; earlier order could not be treated as surviving.

After the Appellate Authority set aside both original customs orders and remanded the matter for fresh composite consideration, the petitioners could not insist that the earlier order survived while the later order was a nullity. The Court held that, in that procedural setting, all contentions had to be pursued before the Tribunal in the pending appeals, and the Tribunal alone would decide them in accordance with law. The request for mandamus based on the alleged survival of the earlier order was rejected, and the writ petitions were dismissed, leaving the parties to proceed with the appeals expeditiously.

---

---

Issues: Whether, after the Appellate Authority had set aside both earlier customs orders and remanded the matter, the petitioners could still contend that the earlier order alone survived and the later order was a nullity so as to seek a mandamus for assessment on that basis.

Analysis: The petitioners had challenged both original orders in appeal, and the Appellate Authority had allowed the appeals and remanded the matter for a fresh, composite consideration by one competent authority. In that situation, the Court held that the petitioners could not rely on the earlier order as still operative or treat the later order as a nullity. Since further appeals were already pending before the Tribunal, it was open to the petitioners to raise all available contentions there, and the Tribunal alone was to decide them in accordance with law.

Conclusion: The contention that the earlier order survived and the later order was a nullity was rejected, and the request for mandamus was not accepted.

Final Conclusion: The writ petitions were dismissed, while leaving the parties to pursue the pending appeals before the Tribunal, which was expected to decide them expeditiously.

Ratio Decidendi: Once original customs orders are set aside in appeal and the matter is remanded, the parties cannot insist that one of the original orders continues to govern the dispute; the controversy must be pursued before the appellate forum or Tribunal in accordance with law.

---