2011 (3) TMI 1189 - AT - Customs

Transfer of appeal - application filed by the assessee with the South Zonal Bench for transfer of the department s appeal to the West Zonal Bench on the ground that their registered office is situated at Mumbai, the South Zonal Bench ordered transfer of that appeal, later on, bench took note of Public Notice and ordered transfer of both the appeals to South Zonal Bench (Chennai) - Assistant Registrar of the Chennai Bench sent a letter requesting for obtaining the approval of the Hon ble President and forwarding the same - Held that - Had the present appeals been filed on or after 5.8.2005 with the Zonal bench concerned (Chennai), the appeals would have been heard by that bench. Prior to 5.8.2005, it was open to a party to file appeal with the Principal Bench or with a Zonal bench and then seek transfer to the jurisdictional bench. This is what was done by the party in the present case, who filed their appeal with this bench and sought transfer of the department s appeal from Chennai bench to this bench on the ground that their registered office is situated in Mumbai. The transfer application was not opposed. This view of ours is at variance with the view taken by the bench on 29.9.2010. Therefore, in the interest of judicial discipline, we would like to have the Hon ble President s decision in the matter before proceeding to hear the appeals. Accordingly, the Assistant Registrar is directed to place the records along with a certified copy of this order before the Hon ble President without delay.

Summary

Issues:
1. Jurisdictional transfer of appeals between Zonal Benches.
2. Interpretation of Public Notice No. 2/2005 regarding filing and hearing of appeals.
3. Procedure for relocation of appeals based on the date of filing.

Analysis:
1. The judgment involves appeals by the assessee and the Revenue against a common order by the Commissioner of Customs, Chennai. The assessee filed an appeal with the West Zonal Bench, while the Revenue's appeal was with the South Zonal Bench in Chennai. An application by the assessee for transfer of the Revenue's appeal to the West Zonal Bench due to their registered office being in Mumbai was granted, leading to the transfer of the appeal to Mumbai. However, both appeals were later transferred back to the South Zonal Bench in Chennai for final hearing.

2. The issue of jurisdictional transfer was examined in light of Public Notice No. 2/2005, which aimed to ensure that appeals within a Zonal bench's jurisdiction are filed and heard by that bench. The Tribunal noted that prior to 5.8.2005, parties could file appeals with any bench and then seek transfer to the jurisdictional bench, as was done in this case. The Tribunal emphasized that both appeals should be heard by the same bench for efficient administration of justice, regardless of the date of filing. It was concluded that the Public Notice issued in 2005 should not affect appeals filed before that date, and any relocation based on the Notice would disrupt the established procedure.

3. The Tribunal acknowledged a discrepancy in views regarding the jurisdictional transfer and decided to seek the decision of the Hon'ble President for clarity before proceeding with the appeals. The Assistant Registrar was directed to present the records and the Tribunal's order to the Hon'ble President promptly. This decision was made in the interest of judicial discipline to ensure a consistent approach in handling the appeals. The judgment highlighted the importance of following established procedures and seeking higher authority's guidance when necessary to maintain the integrity of the judicial process.