2008 (6) TMI 361 - AT - Customs

Application for transfer of the appeal to the West Zonal Bench, Mumbai - The power conferred on the Tribunal under this provision is exercised by the President in matters pertaining to transfer of an appeal between Zonal Benches - appeal was rightly filed with this Bench and must be heard by this Bench - Held that - when the appellant seeks a transfer to another Bench within whose jurisdiction he resides, such application cannot be entertained by this Bench without reference to the President - Rule 41 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 cannot be invoked by the appellant for transfer of his appeal

Summary

Issues:
Transfer of appeal to West Zonal Bench, Mumbai based on appellant's residence and convenience vs. department's convenience to conduct the case at Chennai.

Analysis:
The appellant filed an application for the transfer of the appeal to the West Zonal Bench, Mumbai, against an order by the Commissioner of Customs, Chennai. The appellant argued that since he resided in Mumbai, it would be cost-effective for him to prosecute the case there. The appellant cited a similar transfer application order by the West Zonal Bench, Mumbai, and referred to a Madras High Court order and a previous order of the same Bench. The department, represented by the ld. SDR, stated that it would be easier for them to conduct the case in Chennai due to the availability of case records there.

The Tribunal considered the appellant's request for transfer and acknowledged the convenience for the appellant to prosecute the case in Mumbai. However, the Tribunal highlighted that the procedure for transferring an appeal between Zonal Benches is governed by Section 129C(6) of the Customs Act, where the power to transfer appeals lies with the President. The Tribunal noted that the Public Notice No. 2 of 2005 superseded all previous orders and specified that the appeal was rightly filed with the Chennai Bench. The Tribunal stated that an application for transfer to another Bench based on the appellant's residence requires approval from the President and cannot be entertained without reference to the President. The Tribunal directed the Registry to place the matter before the Hon'ble President for appropriate orders, emphasizing that Rule 41 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 cannot be invoked by the appellant for the transfer of the appeal.

In conclusion, the Tribunal acknowledged the appellant's convenience but emphasized that the transfer of the appeal between Zonal Benches is subject to the President's approval. The Tribunal disagreed with the view taken by the West Zonal Bench, Mumbai, regarding the application of Rule 41 for transfer requests. The Registry was instructed to take necessary follow-up actions promptly.