2004 (3) TMI 634 - AT - Central Excise

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal against Order-in-Appeal rejecting drawback claim under Section 75 of the Customs Act
- Appeal against penalties imposed on Managing Director and Director
- Maintainability of appeals before the Tribunal under Section 129A(1) of the Customs Act
- Alternative remedy of invoking revisional jurisdiction of the Central Government under Section 129DD of the Act

Issue 1: Appeal against Order-in-Appeal rejecting drawback claim under Section 75 of the Customs Act
The judgment involves six appeals, three of which are against Order-in-Appeal Nos. 196-198/2003 and the remaining three against Order-in-Appeal Nos. 202-204/2003. In the first set of appeals, M/s. Sejai International Ltd. filed Appeal No. C/444/2003 challenging the rejection of a drawback claim under Section 75 of the Customs Act. The Managing Director and another Director of the company also appealed against the penalties imposed on them, which were consequential to the rejection of the drawback claim. The appellants argued that had the drawback claim been allowed, the penalties would not have been imposed. However, the Tribunal found these appeals not maintainable before it.

Issue 2: Appeal against penalties imposed on Managing Director and Director
The other set of appeals involved M/s. Meerut Industries Ltd. filing Appeal No. C/447, contesting the rejection of a drawback claim. Similar to the first set, the Managing Director and the Executive Director of the company appealed against the penalties imposed on them. The Tribunal reiterated that these appeals were not maintainable before it under the relevant provision of law.

Issue 3: Maintainability of appeals before the Tribunal under Section 129A(1) of the Customs Act
The main appeals were against the rejection of drawback claims by the Commissioner (Appeals) under Section 128A of the Customs Act. The Tribunal held that as per Clause (c) of the first proviso to Section 129A(1) of the Act, these appeals were not maintainable before the Tribunal. Similarly, the appeals against the penalties imposed on the appellants were also deemed not maintainable under the same provision of law. The judgment clarified that the appropriate remedy for the appellants was to invoke the revisional jurisdiction of the Central Government under Section 129DD of the Act.

Issue 4: Alternative remedy of invoking revisional jurisdiction of the Central Government under Section 129DD of the Act
Ultimately, the Tribunal dismissed all the appeals as not maintainable, directing the appellants to approach the Central Government under Section 129DD of the Customs Act, following the prescribed legal procedures. This decision highlighted the specific legal recourse available to the appellants in such cases, emphasizing the statutory provisions governing the jurisdiction of the Tribunal and the Central Government in matters related to drawback claims and penalties under the Customs Act.