1983 (5) TMI 255 - AT - Customs

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Maintainability of the appeal to the Appellate Tribunal against the decision or order passed by the Additional Collector of Customs.
2. Jurisdiction and rank of the Additional Collector of Customs in relation to the Collector of Customs.
3. Interpretation of relevant sections of the Customs Act, 1962, particularly Sections 2(8), 3, 128, 129A, and 152.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Maintainability of the Appeal:
The primary issue is whether an appeal against the decision or order passed by the Additional Collector of Customs as an adjudicating authority lies to the Appellate Tribunal or to the Collector (Appeals). The Tribunal considered arguments from both sides. The respondent argued that post the Finance (Act No. 2) Act, 1980, appeals against decisions by the Additional Collector of Customs should be directed to the Collector (Appeals). The appellants contended that appeals should lie to the Appellate Tribunal based on the definition of "Collector of Customs" in Section 2(8) of the Customs Act, 1962, which includes an "Additional Collector of Customs."

2. Jurisdiction and Rank of the Additional Collector:
The Tribunal examined whether the Additional Collector of Customs is an officer lower in rank than a Collector of Customs. It was undisputed that the Additional Collector is subordinate to the Collector and that their jurisdiction and powers are not co-extensive with those of the Collector. The Tribunal noted that the Additional Collector's confidential rolls are written by the Collector, reinforcing the subordinate status. It was concluded that the Additional Collector is indeed lower in rank than the Collector of Customs.

3. Interpretation of Relevant Sections:
The Tribunal analyzed various sections of the Customs Act, 1962, to determine the appropriate appellate authority:

- Section 2(8): Defines "Collector of Customs" to include an "Additional Collector of Customs." However, the Tribunal noted that this is an inclusive definition and not absolute, meaning the context can dictate otherwise.

- Section 3: Lists the classes of officers of Customs but does not explicitly include the Additional Collector, implying that the Additional Collector is considered under the general category of "Collector of Customs" only in specific contexts.

- Section 128: Clearly states that appeals against decisions by officers lower in rank than a Collector of Customs lie to the Collector (Appeals).

- Section 129A(1): Provides for appeals to the Appellate Tribunal against orders passed by the Collector of Customs as an adjudicating authority. The Tribunal interpreted that this does not automatically include the Additional Collector unless they are of equal rank to the Collector.

- Section 152: Empowers the Central Government to delegate the powers of the Collector to other officers, but this does not elevate the rank of the Additional Collector to that of a Collector.

The Tribunal emphasized the need to harmonize Sections 128 and 129A(1) to avoid inconsistency. It concluded that the term "Collector of Customs" in Section 129A(1) does not include an Additional Collector who is lower in rank. This interpretation ensures that Section 128 remains meaningful and applicable, maintaining the legislative intent and avoiding absurdity.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal held that appeals against decisions or orders of an Additional Collector of Customs, who is lower in rank than a Collector of Customs, lie to the Collector (Appeals) and not to the Appellate Tribunal. Consequently, the appeals in question were deemed not maintainable before the Appellate Tribunal. The records were ordered to be returned to the appellants for presentation to the appropriate authority, i.e., the Collector (Appeals), within a specified timeframe. The Tribunal also instructed that the period of limitation should consider the initial filing dates with the Central Board of Excise and Customs or the Tribunal.