Home Case Index All Cases Central Excise Central Excise + AT Central Excise - 2010 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2010 (12) TMI 256 - AT - Central ExciseRegarding absence of jurisdiction to the Commissioner (Appeals) to remand the matter - It is settled law by various decisions of the Tribunal by following the decision of the Apex Court that Commissioner (Appeals) lacks jurisdiction to remand the matter - It is decided that the Commissioner (Appeals) in the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remanded to the commissioner (Appeals) to decide the matter on merits - Appeal accordingly stands disposed of
Issues:
1. Jurisdiction of the Commissioner (Appeals) to remand the matter. Analysis: The judgment by the Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, DELHI, involved a challenge to the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) regarding the absence of jurisdiction to remand the matter. The Commissioner (Appeals) had set aside the order passed by the Assistant Commissioner, New Delhi, and remanded the matter for fresh consideration and appropriate order. The Tribunal noted that the Commissioner (Appeals) lacked the authority to remand the matter if he found the order of the Adjudicating Authority unsustainable. Instead, the Commissioner (Appeals) could have set aside the order and proceeded to decide the matter afresh. It was established through various Tribunal decisions following the Apex Court's decision that the Commissioner (Appeals) does not possess the jurisdiction to remand the matter. The Tribunal clarified that the Commissioner (Appeals) is empowered to set aside the order of the adjudicating authority and decide the matter afresh, utilizing all the powers of the original authority. Therefore, the impugned order was set aside to the extent that it involved remanding the matter, and the matter was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for a fresh decision on the merits. The Tribunal emphasized that no opinion was expressed on the case's merits or any other points decided by the Commissioner in the impugned order. Consequently, the appeal was disposed of based on the limited ground of remand issued by the Commissioner (Appeals).
|