2017 (9) TMI 1630 - AT - Customs

Maintainability of appeal - no readjudication order has been passed - Held that - Normally, Tribunal does not pass order of any kind when an appeal is not maintainable. But this is an extreme case of hardship caused to the appellant, which calls for above order in exercise of power conferred on Tribunal under Rule 41 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1987. It may be appreciated that courts are not powerless to render justice since a litigant cannot be remediless.

Summary

Issues: Delay in readjudication order, appeal against notice dated 12.1.2017, direction to approach adjudicating authority, recording submissions and evidence, passing a reasoned order, extreme case of hardship.

The judgment addresses the issue of delay in readjudication order, highlighting that despite a direction by the Tribunal in 2016, no order has been passed for thirteen years. The Tribunal instructs the adjudicating authority to pass an appropriate order expeditiously by 31st December 2017, emphasizing the importance of due process of justice within three months of receiving the order. This issue underscores the significance of timely resolution in legal proceedings to ensure justice is served promptly.

Another issue raised in the judgment is regarding the appeal against the notice dated 12.1.2017. The learned Assistant Commissioner argues that there cannot be an appeal against this notice, which is under challenge in the present appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal directs the appellant to approach the adjudicating authority promptly for passing an appropriate order. If the readjudication order causes grievance, the appellant is advised to seek appeal if permitted by law. This issue highlights the procedural aspect of appealing against specific notices and the importance of following the correct legal procedures.

Furthermore, the judgment emphasizes the importance of recording submissions and evidence thoroughly. The learned Adjudicating Authority is instructed to hear the appellant comprehensively, record all submissions and evidence presented before him, and subsequently pass a reasoned and speaking order. This issue underscores the necessity of a detailed and transparent legal process to ensure a fair and just outcome for all parties involved.

In an exceptional move, the Tribunal acknowledges that normally, orders are not passed when an appeal is not maintainable. However, in this extreme case of hardship faced by the appellant due to the prolonged delay, the Tribunal exercises its power under Rule 41 of CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1987, to intervene. The judgment emphasizes that courts are not powerless to render justice and that a litigant should not be left without a remedy. This issue highlights the Tribunal's discretionary power to address extraordinary circumstances and ensure justice is served, even in situations where standard procedures may not apply.