2008 (8) TMI 740 - AT - Customs

Appeal to Appellate Tribunal - Appealable order - Section 129A of the Customs Act - Held that - A careful reading of Section 129A reveals that only a decision or order passed by the Commissioner of Customs as an adjudicating authority is appealable to the Tribunal. Here, the letter of the Additional Commissioner merely conveys a decision of the Commissioner. The Commissioner performs not only the function of adjudication but various other executive functions. In the capacity of the Executive Officer, the Commissioner issues various orders. All these orders are not appealable to the CESTAT in terms of Section 129A of the Customs Act - appeal rejected being not maintainable.

Summary

Issues:
- Maintainability of the appeal against a decision conveyed by the Additional Commissioner of Customs.

Analysis:
The appeal in question was filed by the appellant against a letter issued by the Additional Commissioner of Customs, conveying the Commissioner's decision allowing the appellant to resume CHA operations at Hyderabad Customs Station for a limited period. The appellant was represented by a learned Consultant, while the revenue was represented by an Authorized Representative. The departmental representative contended that the appeal itself was not maintainable.

Upon careful consideration of the provisions of Section 129A of the Customs Act, it was observed that appeals to the Appellate Tribunal are permissible only against decisions or orders passed by the Commissioner of Customs as an adjudicating authority. The Tribunal emphasized that the Commissioner carries out various executive functions in addition to adjudication. It was highlighted that for an order to be appealable, it must involve the resolution of a dispute between two parties, known as a 'lis.' Orders related to granting or refusing licenses, or approving/rejecting applications, do not fall under the purview of adjudication. Citing the precedent set in the case of G.P. Jaiswal v. C.C.E, Lucknow, the Tribunal clarified that orders of this nature do not qualify as adjudication. Consequently, the appeal against the letter issued by the Additional Commissioner was deemed not maintainable under Section 129A(a) of the Customs Act, leading to its rejection by the Tribunal.

In conclusion, the Tribunal, comprising Dr. S.L. Peeran and Shri T.K. Jayaraman, dismissed the appeal on the grounds of non-maintainability, as the decision conveyed by the Additional Commissioner did not constitute an order passed by the Commissioner of Customs as an adjudicating authority, as required by Section 129A of the Customs Act. The judgment was pronounced in open court on 26-8-2008.