WA NO. 2171 OF 2018 1 2025:KER:25868 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE EASWARAN S. WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF MARCH 2025 / 5TH CHAITHRA, 1947 WA NO. 2171 OF 2018 (AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 31.08.2018IN WP(C) NO.18531 OF 2018) APPELLANT/PETITIONER: M/S. INDUS LOGISTICS TC NO.34/690, CELINE COTTAGE, NEAR AIR FORCE STATION, SHANKUMUGHAM, BEACH POST OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695007, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER GODFREY PRATHAP. BY ADV P.A.AUGUSTIAN RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: 1 COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS T.C.NO.26/34, PRESS CLUB ROAD, I C E BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695001. 2 COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS(PREVENTIVE) 5TH FLOOR, CATHOLIC CENTRE,BROADWAY, COCHIN 682 031. 3 ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SOUTH ZONAL BENCH, 1ST FLOOR, WTC BUILDING, FKCCI COMPLEX, K.G ROAD, BANGALORE 560 009. BY ADVS. SRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL, SC, SRI.GIRISH KUMAR V THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WA NO. 2171 OF 2018 2 2025:KER:25868 JUDGMENT Easwaran S. , J. This appeal is preferred against the judgment dated 31.08.2018 in WP(C).No.18531 of 2018, wherein the learned Single Judge dismissed the Writ Petition, finding that the order passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal is sustained. 2. The brief facts necessary for the disposal of the Writ Appeal are as follows: The appellant is carrying a courier business operating in Trivandrum International Airport. The appellant was aggrieved by the fact that during March 2013, the Commissioner, after reviewing the operations of the appellant, suspended all courier licence, and deregistered them. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant invoked Regulation 14(2) of Courier Imports and Exports (Clearance) Regulation, 1988. By Ext.P1 order, the Chief Commissioner allowed the application and set aside the orders of re-registration, and remanded the matter to the Commissioner. Thereafter, Ext.P4 order was passed against the petitioner. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant preferred an appeal before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore. Pending the appeal, the appellant moved an application seeking a waiver of pre- deposit. The said application was dismissed by the Tribunal. Consequently, the appeal was also dismissed. Though the appellant preferred an application for restoration, the same was also dismissed. Before the learned Single Judge, the appellant contended that in similar cases the Tribunal had granted waiver of the pre-deposit, and considered the appeal and remanded the matter back to the WA NO. 2171 OF 2018 3 2025:KER:25868 Assessing Authority. However, the learned Single Judge did not accept the contention of the appellant and dismissed the Writ Petition. 3. Heard Sri.P.A.Augustian the learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Sri.V.Girishkumar the learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondents. 4. When the appeal was considered by us on 27.01.2025, we noticed the fact that the appellant had not challenged the order by which his appeal was dismissed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal. Faced with this situation, the learned counsel for the appellant sought the indulgence of this Court and subsequently filed I.A No.1 of 2025 seeking to amend the relief sought for in the Writ Petition at the appellate stage. We have perused the affidavit accompanying the application for amendment, we are of the view that in the interest of justice, the application deserves to be allowed and by separate order in the application, we have allowed the same. 5. The infirmity attached to the pleadings in the Writ Petition having been cured, and when we proceed to consider the appeal on merits, we find that by Ext.P7 order dated 12.02.2015, the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Tribunal, Bangalore had set aside the order passed in similar cases and remanded the matter back to the authorities for a de novo adjudication. We have been told that pursuant to the order of remand, the matters are still pending adjudication and are said to be finalised. Therefore, the interest of justice, we feel that the appellant should also get the same benefit. Accordingly, we set aside Exts.P3, P4 and P10 orders and allow the Writ appeal, and consequently, the Writ petition and remand the matter back to the 2nd WA NO. 2171 OF 2018 4 2025:KER:25868 respondent for a de novo adjudication. No costs. The Writ Appeal is allowed as above. Sd/- DR. A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE Sd/- EASWARAN S. JUDGE mns WA NO. 2171 OF 2018 5 2025:KER:25868 APPENDIX OF WA 2171/2018 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure B TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FOR AMENDMENT OF THE WRIT PETITION FILED UNDER RULE 155 OF THE HIGH COURT RULES