9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2011 (7) TMI 921 - AT - Central ExciseNotification No. 32/2005-Cus. dated 8.4.2005 - The statement of Shri Satya Narayan Chandak, proprietor of M/s Shankara Silk & Sarees was recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act and in his statement he admitted that the raw silk yarn in question were purchased from the Appellant M/s L.G.W. Ltd - the import is made in 2007 and there is still time to issue a proper Show Cause Notice if so required. The issue of jurisdiction is not raised before the lower authority, hence there is no finding on this issue - Appeal is allowed by way of remand
Issues: Jurisdiction of the Deputy Commissioner (Preventive) Varanasi in issuing Show Cause Notice, Violation of Notification No. 32/2005-Cus., Confiscation of raw silk yarn, Imposition of penalties
In this case, the Appellant, M/s L.G.W. Ltd., imported Chinese silk yarn under Notification No. 32/2005-Cus. dated 8.4.2005, which prohibited selling the imported raw material in the market. However, 12 bales of raw silk yarn were found in the godown of M/s Shankara Silk & Sarees, Varanasi, allegedly purchased from the Appellant. The Adjudicating Authority ordered the confiscation of the raw silk yarn and imposed penalties on the Appellants for violating the notification. The Commissioner (Appeals) upheld the decision. The Appellant raised a jurisdictional objection regarding the Deputy Commissioner (Preventive) Varanasi's authority to issue the Show Cause Notice, citing relevant legal precedents. The Revenue argued that the jurisdiction issue was raised for the first time before the Tribunal and that the Appellant had submitted to the Assistant Commissioner's jurisdiction previously. The Tribunal found the jurisdiction issue valid and remanded the case to the Adjudicating Authority to decide on jurisdiction and other matters. The Tribunal emphasized that the issue of jurisdiction could be raised at the appellate stage and that the lack of jurisdiction needed to be addressed before proceeding further. The Appeals were disposed of by way of remand, allowing the Revenue to issue a fresh notice if lack of jurisdiction was found, and giving an opportunity to decide the matter accordingly.
|
