2026 (6) TMI 1067

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..../b Laxicon Law Partners,. P. C. 1. The above Appeal has been filed by the Revenue challenging the order dated 8th June 2026 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short "CESTAT") in Customs Appeal No. 85943 of 2026 filed by the Respondent herein. 2. By the impugned order, the CESTAT set aside the order dated 5th May 2026 of the learned Commissioner of Customs, who had continued the suspension of the Approval of the Respondent as a Container Freight Station (for short "CFS"). The order, however, made it clear that the Commissioner of Customs, as a Licensing Authority, is free to take any action as provided under the Handling of Cargo in Customs Areas Regulations, 2009 (for short "HCCAR, 2009"), includi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....er need for the suspension order to continue. According to him, by continuing the suspension order, it is not a preventive action but a punitive one, which, according to Mr. Nankani is impermissible in law. 7. After we heard the parties for some time, we find that the argument canvassed by Mr. Nankani and as formulated by him before us in the preceding paragraph is not the argument that was canvassed before the Tribunal. Therefore, naturally, the Tribunal has given no findings on this aspect since the aforesaid proposition was never canvassed before the Tribunal. When we noticed this and put it to the parties, the parties agreed that the impugned order can be set aside, and the matter be remanded back to the Tribunal to examine the propo....